NookieNotes
Posts: 1720
Joined: 11/10/2013
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: CarpeComa
What is the threshold? 'No' is an easy threshold to understand. Enthusiastic? Not so much. How enthusiastic is enthusiastic enough?
Enthusiastic enough that I don't think that there is a chance I could be doing anything wrong.
quote:
Do you really want to be held to determining whether or not the other person is appropriately enthusiastic?
LOGICAL FALLACY: Argument from Consequences
Yes, I do.
quote:
Do you want to be 100% liable for misreading the situation?
Yes, I do.
quote:
Isn't the potential to misread the situation a major rationale behind safe words?
The potential to misread a sexual situation? No. It's about an alternate play situation. Things like pain, where sometimes you cannot tell the difference between enthusiastic processing of pain and a lack of desire. Where "fuck," and "no," are used to handle the pain, but not to stop it.
quote:
What if no one says anything prior to the act? Have we then violated each other?
LOGICAL FALLACY: Slippery Slope
Unless there was enthusiastic consent, you have violated each other whether you spoke before any sexual act or not.
quote:
Now how complicated does this get when it is you, me, and Dupree?
No more complex. Have you ever had a threesome? A threesome is not inherently more or less complex in my experience than a twosome.
It's simply a matter of only doing what is enthusiastically embraced.
quote:
If consent can be withdrawn at anytime and you can't count on a 'no' from the other person, how do you know when to stop? Remember that the rules are that proceeding one instant past the withdrawal of consent is a crime. Furthermore, what keeps the other person from saying later "I was just saying yes, but I didn't really mean it" or "I was just saying yes/acting enthused because I was afraid of what would happen if I didn't"? You might notice that the latter is merely a slight rephrasing of the 'I was afraid to say no' rationale.
LOGICAL FALLACY: Appeal to Fear
Well, that is on each individual to decide whether the other is convincing enough.
I often ask myself, "Does s/he want this from me? How do I know?"
I ask them, "I'm thinking of running my finger down your arm, just so. May I touch?" If they say yes, I do it, and tell them how much I enjoyed it. I allow them the room to invite more or not.
Sometimes, I admit, this takes me months to properly seduce someone, but it's worth the effort for me. I have been told over and over that I make people feel 100% safe with me, in every way.
quote:
We are likely in the beginning stages of a moral panic around rape. As moral panics thrive on ambiguity, the best move to take to defuse such a panic is to establish and reinforce clear explicit guidelines in order to minimize the number of people that will get swept up in the panic. 'No means no' is clear and explicit. 'Enthusiastic, affirmative consent' is not clear nor explicit as 'enthusiasm' is not an objective standard and 'affirmation' is only good for the instant that the affirmation is being expressed (because that affirmation can be voided at any other instant by silently withdrawing consent). It is likely not a coincidence that the people who stand to benefit from a moral panic also are the strongest proponents of affirmative consent.
It is likely not a coincidence that the people who worry most about affirmative consent also are the strongest proponents of "what if you don't know...". Then GET TO KNOW, motherfucker! Get to them as people, rather than hooking up with an inebriated girl or a stranger, or a friend who is exhausted, or whatever. Take your time.
Or, as with STIs, take you risks.
KNOW that she may be lying (about her enthusiasm status or his STI status). Trust no one until you KNOW them. Period. Seems simple enough. Quit going for the easy lay.
quote:
Victim culture. We have been steadily moving towards a culture that increasingly rewards and encourages people to be victims. Victims get to call on the muscle of the state and their communities to right whatever they feel was wrong. Victims get celebrated as 'brave', 'survivor', and 'noble' along with being granted the moral authority that comes with those attributions. Affirmative consent will help feed victim culture by making it easier for people to claim they were victims, due to the aforementioned issues with the standard.
Bullshit.
Because it is up to BOTH parties to enthusiastically consent and ALWAYS be responsible.
As someone who has endured attempted rape twice, many consent violations, and has broken my own rules of consent, I am VERY STRONGLY for taking responsibility for who I sleep with, and NEVER, EVER, EVER sleeping with someone who is not 100% enthusiastic about being with me in every single way.
Period.
I do not want it elsewise.
Which, it seems, is the problem, right? Because you don't want to go through that effort, or make others responsible for doing so. Funny, we put less effort into getting sex sometimes than into grabbing fast food for dinner.
quote:
The infantilization of women. This is where women are routinely held to a lower standard because vagina. This flies in the face of the claim of equality and will eventually undo a lot of what feminism has done to date if it isn't resisted. The general dynamic for sex (for the vast majority of people the vast majority of the time) is male initiation and female acceptance/rejection. As a man's consent to sexual activity is generally assumed even without his initiation (not saying this is how it should be, just that it is), this new standard is going to be almost exclusively enforced against men seeking the consent of women. Taking this into account, the implicit conceit of affirmative consent is that women are too weak/timid/shy/whatever to be considered responsible enough to say no. You generally wouldn't think a man would have an issue saying no, would you? So if men should be responsible but women should not, that is holding women to a lower standard.
Huh. So, you're saying that although we (in this case) hold men and women to the same standards, because men might use them (and therefore misuse them) more often, that infantilizes women?
I don't get it.
Nope. Not at all.
_____________________________
Nookie
--
https://datingkinky.com
I Write! A few of my books on Amazon: http://amazon.com/author/msnnotes
|
Sex Ed Lesson: ‘Yes Means Yes,’ but It’s Tricky - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread