"The Smartest Thing I've Ever Read About Consent"

[Delta4Embassy]

The Smartest Thing I ve Ever Read About Consent Buster Ross

"Cathy Young's recent piece in the Washington Post, "Feminists want us to define these ugly sexual encounters as rape. Don't let them," is the most important piece to appear in the minefield of modern discourse on "affirmative consent."

As a sex educator, my work is all about supporting people to be able to have important sexual health conversations, and to be empowered in their bodies and what they choose to do with them. There is a new sexual shame that is going unchecked, one that says to make any "mistakes" or have "regrettable sexual experiences" is always wrong, when in fact, it is how we often learn.

Shame is actually far more problematic than anything else assumed to be a sex problem. This emerging sexual perfectionism is just a repackaging of the old idea that sex is dirty, something to fear, something that is bad. To give the message that sex should always be a certain way is troubling. We instead need to focus on the principles of sexual health, which each of us can interpret in different ways based on the unique people all of us.

You, the person reading this, you are only reading this because at least one of your parents had an orgasm while having sex with another parent many years ago, and it's quite likely that both of them had an orgasm -- one so powerful that it created you.

Sex is wonderful, but violence isn't. Sex isn't the problem. Violence is the problem. But even more than violence, our inability to communicate is the problem. "

rest at link (bolded mine)

 

[Iceweasel]

Could you translate that into English? Thanks.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Could you translate that into English? Thanks.

If you recall, there was a bunch of threads and media pieces about college campuses redefining sexual consent in pretty draconian ways? What this was about, in part (I believe.)

 

[pillars]

What Affirmative Consent Actually Means ThinkProgress

The current societal script on sex assumes that passivity and silence — essentially, the “lack of a no” — means it’s okay to proceed. That’s on top of the fact that male sexuality has been socially defined as aggressive, something that can result in men feeling entitled to sex, while women have been taught that sex is something that simply happens to them rather than something they’re an active participant in. It’s not hard to imagine how couples end up in ambiguous situations where one partner is not exactly comfortable with going forward, but also not exactly comfortable saying no.

Under an affirmative consent standard, on the other hand, both partners are required to pay more attention to whether they’re feeling enthusiastic about the sexual experience they’re having. There aren’t any assumptions about where the sexual encounter is going or whether both people are already on the same page. At its very basic level, this is the opposite of killing the mood — it’s about making sure the person with whom you’re about to have sex is excited about having sex with you.

Making sure someone else is enthusiastic about what you’re doing with them requires you to consider their wants and needs, think about how to bring them pleasure, and ultimately approach sex like a partnership instead of a means to your own end.

My kids and I have had pretty open conversations about sex. They are very different, because I have a son and a daughter. With my daughter, the conversations have been about protecting herself, protecting her partner, making good choices about using alcohol in mixed settings, and making conscious decisions about sex.

With my son, the conversations have been about protecting himself from STDs, an unplanned pregnancy, and most importantly, a rape allegation. I've advised my son to never have sex under certain circumstances: with a girl who is clearly intoxicated, with a girl that he doesn't know well, without protection that he himself provides, and without the girl clearly indicating that she wants to have sex.

Affirmative consent laws may not be perfect, but if you are a guy and you are contemplating sex with a woman who does not actively and affirmatively consent to sex, you are risking a rape allegation under existing laws. If you don't realize that and/or act to protect yourself, you are stupid.

However, I have to wonder about the motive for the OP. Is the OP saying it is a bad thing to push people to be sure that their partners are willing and engaged in having sex?

 

[Bonzi]

Is this even possible to enforce?

 

[Delta4Embassy]

What Affirmative Consent Actually Means ThinkProgress

The current societal script on sex assumes that passivity and silence — essentially, the “lack of a no” — means it’s okay to proceed. That’s on top of the fact that male sexuality has been socially defined as aggressive, something that can result in men feeling entitled to sex, while women have been taught that sex is something that simply happens to them rather than something they’re an active participant in. It’s not hard to imagine how couples end up in ambiguous situations where one partner is not exactly comfortable with going forward, but also not exactly comfortable saying no.

Under an affirmative consent standard, on the other hand, both partners are required to pay more attention to whether they’re feeling enthusiastic about the sexual experience they’re having. There aren’t any assumptions about where the sexual encounter is going or whether both people are already on the same page. At its very basic level, this is the opposite of killing the mood — it’s about making sure the person with whom you’re about to have sex is excited about having sex with you.

Making sure someone else is enthusiastic about what you’re doing with them requires you to consider their wants and needs, think about how to bring them pleasure, and ultimately approach sex like a partnership instead of a means to your own end.

My kids and I have had pretty open conversations about sex. They are very different, because I have a son and a daughter. With my daughter, the conversations have been about protecting herself, protecting her partner, making good choices about using alcohol in mixed settings, and making conscious decisions about sex.

With my son, the conversations have been about protecting himself from STDs, an unplanned pregnancy, and most importantly, a rape allegation. I've advised my son to never have sex under certain circumstances: with a girl who is clearly intoxicated, with a girl that he doesn't know well, without protection that he himself provides, and without the girl clearly indicating that she wants to have sex.

Affirmative consent laws may not be perfect, but if you are a guy and you are contemplating sex with a woman who does not actively and affirmatively consent to sex, you are risking a rape allegation under existing laws. If you don't realize that and/or act to protect yourself, you are stupid.

However, I have to wonder about the motive for the OP. Is the OP saying it is a bad thing to push people to be sure that their partners are willing and engaged in having sex?

OP article is about how people are trying to mischaracterize sex as something negative to be protected from as with the bolded portion.

 

[Katzndogz]

Not having had sex is not a defense to rape. Ask Brian Banks. He spent five years in prison and never had sex with the girl who claimed that he raped her.

After wrongfully imprisoned Banks now has a career in NFL - NY Daily News

 

[Delta4Embassy]

What Affirmative Consent Actually Means ThinkProgress

The current societal script on sex assumes that passivity and silence — essentially, the “lack of a no” — means it’s okay to proceed. That’s on top of the fact that male sexuality has been socially defined as aggressive, something that can result in men feeling entitled to sex, while women have been taught that sex is something that simply happens to them rather than something they’re an active participant in. It’s not hard to imagine how couples end up in ambiguous situations where one partner is not exactly comfortable with going forward, but also not exactly comfortable saying no.

Under an affirmative consent standard, on the other hand, both partners are required to pay more attention to whether they’re feeling enthusiastic about the sexual experience they’re having. There aren’t any assumptions about where the sexual encounter is going or whether both people are already on the same page. At its very basic level, this is the opposite of killing the mood — it’s about making sure the person with whom you’re about to have sex is excited about having sex with you.

Making sure someone else is enthusiastic about what you’re doing with them requires you to consider their wants and needs, think about how to bring them pleasure, and ultimately approach sex like a partnership instead of a means to your own end.

My kids and I have had pretty open conversations about sex. They are very different, because I have a son and a daughter. With my daughter, the conversations have been about protecting herself, protecting her partner, making good choices about using alcohol in mixed settings, and making conscious decisions about sex.

With my son, the conversations have been about protecting himself from STDs, an unplanned pregnancy, and most importantly, a rape allegation. I've advised my son to never have sex under certain circumstances: with a girl who is clearly intoxicated, with a girl that he doesn't know well, without protection that he himself provides, and without the girl clearly indicating that she wants to have sex.

Affirmative consent laws may not be perfect, but if you are a guy and you are contemplating sex with a woman who does not actively and affirmatively consent to sex, you are risking a rape allegation under existing laws. If you don't realize that and/or act to protect yourself, you are stupid.

However, I have to wonder about the motive for the OP. Is the OP saying it is a bad thing to push people to be sure that their partners are willing and engaged in having sex?

Point the people writing about the new standards proposed for giving consent was you're risking a rape allegation for any sex you might have if now a woman can regret her actions, and accuse her partner of rape. The bar is being set lower in other words. And in light of how just an allegation can have major effects on the accused's life even when innocent, it's worrisome to depict sex as something automatically linked with violence as in the case of rape.

 

[Bonzi]

Also, I am a woman but think it's ridiculous for women to wear short skirts, low cut tops, then not understand why men are aggressive with them - no excuse but if you don't like that don't tempt people.....

COMMON SENSE PEOPLE!

 

[Muhammed]

The Smartest Thing I ve Ever Read About Consent Buster Ross

"Cathy Young's recent piece in the Washington Post, "Feminists want us to define these ugly sexual encounters as rape. Don't let them," is the most important piece to appear in the minefield of modern discourse on "affirmative consent."

As a sex educator, my work is all about supporting people to be able to have important sexual health conversations, and to be empowered in their bodies and what they choose to do with them. There is a new sexual shame that is going unchecked, one that says to make any "mistakes" or have "regrettable sexual experiences" is always wrong, when in fact, it is how we often learn.

Shame is actually far more problematic than anything else assumed to be a sex problem. This emerging sexual perfectionism is just a repackaging of the old idea that sex is dirty, something to fear, something that is bad. To give the message that sex should always be a certain way is troubling. We instead need to focus on the principles of sexual health, which each of us can interpret in different ways based on the unique people all of us.

You, the person reading this, you are only reading this because at least one of your parents had an orgasm while having sex with another parent many years ago, and it's quite likely that both of them had an orgasm -- one so powerful that it created you.

Sex is wonderful, but violence isn't. Sex isn't the problem. Violence is the problem. But even more than violence, our inability to communicate is the problem. "

rest at link (bolded mine)

Psycho-alert!

 

[pillars]

Point the people writing about the new standards proposed for giving consent was you're risking a rape allegation for any sex you might have if now a woman can regret her actions, and accuse her partner of rape. The bar is being set lower in other words. And in light of how just an allegation can have major effects on the accused's life even when innocent, it's worrisome to depict sex as something automatically linked with violence as in the case of rape.

In most cases, rape will continue to be a he-said, she-said thing. This removes silence as consent.

I'm sure the problem for you is that any young woman who has sex with you is likely to regret it.