Go Back   Literotica Discussion Board > Main Literotica Forums > Authors' Hangout

Reply
 
Thread Tools

Old 02-18-2018, 03:27 PM   #76
8letters
Literotica Guru
 
8letters is offline
Join Date: May 2013
Location: USA
Posts: 873
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bramblethorn View Post
Context: "positive consent" is a concept that's been getting a bit of airplay in the last few years, basically the idea that consent should involve an explicit "yes" or equivalent, rather than just "she didn't say no so I assume she was okay with it".
The definitions of positive consent I had read before the article was positive approval for every step every time. I couldn't find anything that described how that would work in real-life (i.e. on a date with someone you've been dating and have been sexually active for a while).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bramblethorn View Post
I'm a big fan of positive consent IRL, and I often include it in my stories (as you may have noticed - I see you've been reading :-) Sometimes it's as simple as "if you kiss me, I'm going to drag you off to bed" and sometimes it's a more formal discussion. But I don't think I've explicitly labelled it as "positive consent", which might be why I haven't had that sort of hostile comment on mine - or it may be to do with categories.
Again, that's not positive consent as I've seen it defined and something like "if you kiss me, I'm going to drag you off to bed" can easily turn disastrous.

I ended up making up how positive consent could work. Here's how Todd (the brother) described positive consent to Ashlynne (the sister):
Quote:
Originally Posted by 8letters
“Positive consent means that both of us had to consent to every step in the making out process every time.”

“Every step every time?”

“Yes.”

“Didn’t that feel stupid, particularly after a while?”

“It felt very stupid at first. On our first date, we went to dinner and a movie. At the movie, I asked if I could hold her hand and she agreed. Then she asked if she could kiss me and I agreed. Once the movie was over, we got in the car and once I was out of the parking spot, I reach over and grabbed her hand. She yanked it out of my hand and told me that I needed to ask permission before I did something.”

“And what did you think of that?”

“I thought this was going to be our only date.”

“But you went out again?”

“I changed my mind when later, back in her room, she asked if she could give me head.” Ashlynne chuckled. “We quickly dropped verbally asking permission and went to using hand and body gestures.”

“Like what?”

“If I wanted to hold Mandy’s hand, I’d stick my hand out like this.” I held my hand down at 45 degrees from my body with my fingers spread wide. “If she wanted to hold my hand, she’d grab it. She wasn’t obligated to do so.”

I discussed the other gestures we used to ask and give permission. There were a lot of them. I finished with, “If I wanted to touch her pussy, I’d put my palm on her belly button with my fingers pointed down. She would spread her legs to give me permission. Same for her if she wanted to touch my dick. We’d always ask verbal permission for oral sex and for intercourse.”
__________________
Blog on my writing.

Latest story - My Cookie-Baking Sister

Most popular stories - My European Summer Vacation, My Sister Set Me Up on a Blind Date and My Lingerie-Loving Sister Moves In
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-18-2018, 04:52 PM   #77
SimonDoom
Literotica Guru
 
SimonDoom is offline
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: USA
Posts: 1,894
Quote:
Originally Posted by 8letters View Post
The definitions of positive consent I had read before the article was positive approval for every step every time. I couldn't find anything that described how that would work in real-life (i.e. on a date with someone you've been dating and have been sexually active for a while).


Again, that's not positive consent as I've seen it defined and something like "if you kiss me, I'm going to drag you off to bed" can easily turn disastrous.

I ended up making up how positive consent could work. Here's how Todd (the brother) described positive consent to Ashlynne (the sister):
The problem I have with this is that I can understand the role of positive consent in theory, sort of, but I don't see how it's applied in practice. The reality of sex is that it often doesn't happen this way. Two people meet at a party, they have some drinks, they hook up back at someone's place, and sex happens. Later, memories are fuzzy about who gave what consent to whom. I think the reality is that sex happens this way all the time and that in the great majorities of cases the participants believe at the time that it is consensual sex. So does the rule put the male at jeopardy of a rape charge? It would be a travesty if it did.

It's fine to advise young men that they need to take the role of consent more seriously and understand the risks of not doing so. But to impose a rule that potentially subjects one to a rape charge for behavior that was in fact at the time understood to be consensual and not a crime, if that's what this rule does, seems wrong to me. The defendant should never bear the burden of proof against any crime of having to disprove an element of the crime -- we should never presume that sex was nonconsensual because it happened and then put the burden on the man to prove there was consent. The presumption must be that one is innocent until the charging party proves all the elements of the crime -- including that the sex was nonconsensual.

The other problematic thing about it is that "positive consent" assumes that the man is always the aggressor and that the woman acts as a kind of gatekeeper, and for the man to get through each successive gate lawfully he's got to give the right password. But in fact sex often is something that just happens between two people -- what does it mean to require consent in such cases? Who is to give consent to whom? A rule that treats the man and woman as necessarily standing in very different positions every time sex happens is a regressive rule, in some ways, in its assumptions about men and women and their roles. That doesn't strike me as a good thing.

As long as positive consent doesn't mean that express verbal consent is required (because consent can, and is in the real world, given in many ways), as long as it isn't inflexible in its assumptions about men and women, and as long as it doesn't put the burden of proof on the man, then it seems reasonable to me, but I'm just not sure that's how it works in practice.
__________________
My stories are at https://www.literotica.com/stories/m...ge=submissions.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-18-2018, 06:13 PM   #78
JasonClearwater
Literotica Guru
 
JasonClearwater is offline
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 931
Quote:
Originally Posted by SimonDoom View Post
The problem I have with this is that I can understand the role of positive consent in theory, sort of, but I don't see how it's applied in practice. The reality of sex is that it often doesn't happen this way. Two people meet at a party, they have some drinks, they hook up back at someone's place, and sex happens. Later, memories are fuzzy about who gave what consent to whom. I think the reality is that sex happens this way all the time and that in the great majorities of cases the participants believe at the time that it is consensual sex. So does the rule put the male at jeopardy of a rape charge? It would be a travesty if it did.

It's fine to advise young men that they need to take the role of consent more seriously and understand the risks of not doing so. But to impose a rule that potentially subjects one to a rape charge for behavior that was in fact at the time understood to be consensual and not a crime, if that's what this rule does, seems wrong to me. The defendant should never bear the burden of proof against any crime of having to disprove an element of the crime -- we should never presume that sex was nonconsensual because it happened and then put the burden on the man to prove there was consent. The presumption must be that one is innocent until the charging party proves all the elements of the crime -- including that the sex was nonconsensual.

The other problematic thing about it is that "positive consent" assumes that the man is always the aggressor and that the woman acts as a kind of gatekeeper, and for the man to get through each successive gate lawfully he's got to give the right password. But in fact sex often is something that just happens between two people -- what does it mean to require consent in such cases? Who is to give consent to whom? A rule that treats the man and woman as necessarily standing in very different positions every time sex happens is a regressive rule, in some ways, in its assumptions about men and women and their roles. That doesn't strike me as a good thing.

As long as positive consent doesn't mean that express verbal consent is required (because consent can, and is in the real world, given in many ways), as long as it isn't inflexible in its assumptions about men and women, and as long as it doesn't put the burden of proof on the man, then it seems reasonable to me, but I'm just not sure that's how it works in practice.
Hey Simon, weighing in here - there are a few troubling statements here.

The first is that 'positive consent' is something only men should ask for. It's being taught to men, as they have a tendency to overpower and coerce women, more often than women do in reverse, but everyone should be gaining enthusiastic consent. This is not solely the man's responsibility.

It also troubles me that you're more concerned about a man being held up on a rape charge, than a woman being coerced or forced into sex while essentially stupified. We know this happens on a regular basis, far more often and with more far-reaching consequences than 'false rape charges'.

As a male, it's easy enough to say to yourself, is this person capable of giving consent? I've not been so drunk I couldn't do that. If I was that drunk, I wouldn't be able to fuck in the first place. There's nothing wrong with impressing on everyone that they need to take responsibility for their actions, and curb their own alcohol consumption, rather than putting that responsibility onto their partner. And again, I'm talking about both parties. And it shouldn't be out of fear of a rape charge - it should be out of concern that the other person can't consent.

We need to shift the focus away from fear of penalties, to fear of doing damage. Be sober more often. Only fuck sober. It's really not that difficult to do.

You're right, that nine times out of ten, two people have sex, it's all consensual, it's not an issue. But it can never hurt to impress on yourself the idea that you should gain positive consent before touching or having sex with someone else. We can change this culture, but we do need to take responsibility for our own actions first.

What's the worst that could happen? You try for consent, she or he can't give it, and you don't fuck. I'd far rather that were the consequence of a hard night out, than waking up in the morning wondering if I forced someone, or feeling coerced into something I didn't want to do.
__________________
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

I'm a leaf on the wind. Watch how I

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-18-2018, 07:22 PM   #79
SimonDoom
Literotica Guru
 
SimonDoom is offline
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: USA
Posts: 1,894
Quote:
Originally Posted by JasonClearwater View Post
Hey Simon, weighing in here - there are a few troubling statements here.

The first is that 'positive consent' is something only men should ask for. It's being taught to men, as they have a tendency to overpower and coerce women, more often than women do in reverse, but everyone should be gaining enthusiastic consent. This is not solely the man's responsibility.

It also troubles me that you're more concerned about a man being held up on a rape charge, than a woman being coerced or forced into sex while essentially stupified. We know this happens on a regular basis, far more often and with more far-reaching consequences than 'false rape charges'.

As a male, it's easy enough to say to yourself, is this person capable of giving consent? I've not been so drunk I couldn't do that. If I was that drunk, I wouldn't be able to fuck in the first place. There's nothing wrong with impressing on everyone that they need to take responsibility for their actions, and curb their own alcohol consumption, rather than putting that responsibility onto their partner. And again, I'm talking about both parties. And it shouldn't be out of fear of a rape charge - it should be out of concern that the other person can't consent.

We need to shift the focus away from fear of penalties, to fear of doing damage. Be sober more often. Only fuck sober. It's really not that difficult to do.

You're right, that nine times out of ten, two people have sex, it's all consensual, it's not an issue. But it can never hurt to impress on yourself the idea that you should gain positive consent before touching or having sex with someone else. We can change this culture, but we do need to take responsibility for our own actions first.

What's the worst that could happen? You try for consent, she or he can't give it, and you don't fuck. I'd far rather that were the consequence of a hard night out, than waking up in the morning wondering if I forced someone, or feeling coerced into something I didn't want to do.
Jason, a few points. It's an important subject and I want to make sure I'm not misunderstood.

1. It may be true that in most cases the man can overpower the woman, but sometimes that's not true. What if the woman is more powerful? What if all the facts show that she had the power over the man and not vice versa? Is the man still under exactly the same burden to obtain consent? Shouldn't the woman have the burden, if, in the facts of that particular case, she had much more power than he did? In this case, a male-only rule would not be right, not only because it's discriminatory, but because in this case the legal rules do not reflect the actual circumstances of the situation.

That's my basic point: laws and rules must reflect reality, not be based upon a model of behavior that does not in fact conform to how people actually behave. If in fact, under all the circumstances, a substantial number of sex acts occur that do not meet these criteria but which, as the parties actually experienced them, were deemed by them to be consensual, then these rules pose the risk that a substantial number of innocent people will be found guilty. That's not right.

2. It is not at all true that I care more about the man charged than about the woman harmed. That's exactly like saying that if I believe in a rigorous presumption of innocence in murder cases I must care more about the murderer than the victim. Obviously, that's illogical and not true, but somehow we have lost sight of the necessity of the presumption of innocence in rape cases. It's a bedrock principle of our system of justice that it's better for 9 guilty men to go free than for one innocent man to go to jail (one can quibble about the right ratio), and that principle applies every bit as much in a rape case as in any other case.

3. I have no objection to a policy of teaching people to be more sensitive and aware on the issue of consent. That's a good policy. My issue is with the ramifications of this rule as applied in cases where a person is charged and faces punishment, and how it's going to work, and whether we're going to be criminalizing behavior that the participants do not, at the time, actually regard as criminal. That makes no sense, if that's the result.

4. It's possible that the positive consent rule will be applied in a way that doesn't create the problems I'm raising. I think it's a work in progress. I don't want to sound like I'm overly alarmed, or that I think the problem of sending innocent men to jail is a bigger problem today than sexual assault, because I don't believe that. We'll see how it plays out.
__________________
My stories are at https://www.literotica.com/stories/m...ge=submissions.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-18-2018, 07:55 PM   #80
JasonClearwater
Literotica Guru
 
JasonClearwater is offline
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 931
Quote:
Originally Posted by SimonDoom View Post
Jason, a few points. It's an important subject and I want to make sure I'm not misunderstood.

1. It may be true that in most cases the man can overpower the woman, but sometimes that's not true. What if the woman is more powerful? What if all the facts show that she had the power over the man and not vice versa? Is the man still under exactly the same burden to obtain consent? Shouldn't the woman have the burden, if, in the facts of that particular case, she had much more power than he did? In this case, a male-only rule would not be right, not only because it's discriminatory, but because in this case the legal rules do not reflect the actual circumstances of the situation.
Yes. I always make that clear. Both parties should obtain consent, regardless of physical power. That's why I like the idea of teaching enthusiastic consent to everyone, regardless of gender or sexuality. I've been just as uncomfortable being touched by women as men, when I've not been interested. 'Consent' is not a male-only rule, but it's one men need to understand. We have, in general, done most of the raping. It's women wandering around wondering if we're going to murder them. Take a quick poll - how many of your male friends are concerned about being mauled while drunk? Hence, more weight placed on teaching consent to men. It's not women taking videos on their phone of themselves raping men, and putting them on the internet.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SimonDoom View Post
That's my basic point: laws and rules must reflect reality, not be based upon a model of behavior that does not in fact conform to how people actually behave. If in fact, under all the circumstances, a substantial number of sex acts occur that do not meet these criteria but which, as the parties actually experienced them, were deemed by them to be consensual, then these rules pose the risk that a substantial number of innocent people will be found guilty. That's not right.
The point is, behaviour needs to change. That's the whole point of teaching everyone to actively consider consent before engaging. At one point in history, you could say the law of 'don't kill people who piss you off' didn't reflect how people behaved. Thankfully, we pulled through, and we've got a better system now. And, I'd point out, during #metoo, every single man and woman I spoke with who'd been sexually assaulted, had been assaulted or forced by a man. Do some women force themselves on men? I can tell you that yes, they absolutely do. Hence, we teach it to everyone. How many of those people's assaulters had been punished in any way at all? Zero. Not a single one. So, the risk of someone being taken to court for something they didn't do, seems highly unlikely to the point of, yes, I'm sure it'll happen from time to time, but not as often as women and men are assaulted and raped.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SimonDoom View Post
2. It is not at all true that I care more about the man charged than about the woman harmed. That's exactly like saying that if I believe in a rigorous presumption of innocence in murder cases I must care more about the murderer than the victim. Obviously, that's illogical and not true, but somehow we have lost sight of the necessity of the presumption of innocence in rape cases. It's a bedrock principle of our system of justice that it's better for 9 guilty men to go free than for one innocent man to go to jail (one can quibble about the right ratio), and that principle applies every bit as much in a rape case as in any other case.
And in every case, proof is still required. Which is why almost zero people are ever punished for actual rape, never mind made-up rape. Which is why I consider this a non-issue. I'm far more concerned I'm making someone uncomfortable, and I would like it if everyone else was just as concerned.


Quote:
Originally Posted by SimonDoom View Post
3. I have no objection to a policy of teaching people to be more sensitive and aware on the issue of consent. That's a good policy. My issue is with the ramifications of this rule as applied in cases where a person is charged and faces punishment, and how it's going to work, and whether we're going to be criminalizing behavior that the participants do not, at the time, actually regard as criminal. That makes no sense, if that's the result.
There is no 'rule'. There will only be a societally accepted way of treating others, which will make our culture a touch less rapey. I don't honestly believe, given the sentences given to actual rapists so far, that those who've not done anything wrong will ever see the inside of a jail cell.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SimonDoom View Post
4. It's possible that the positive consent rule will be applied in a way that doesn't create the problems I'm raising. I think it's a work in progress. I don't want to sound like I'm overly alarmed, or that I think the problem of sending innocent men to jail is a bigger problem today than sexual assault, because I don't believe that. We'll see how it plays out.
I understand. The last thing anyone wants is to be accused of something they haven't done. It's the worst possible accusation that could be levelled against you. But as I see it, it can do far more good than harm.
__________________
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

I'm a leaf on the wind. Watch how I

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-18-2018, 07:59 PM   #81
ausfet
Really Experienced
 
ausfet is offline
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Australia
Posts: 171
Oh come on, we're all supposed to stay sober and straight (no drugs) for sex and we need to repeatedly seek express consent for every iota of sexual activity?

Not only is the idea that a drunk m/f couple happily agreeing to have a shag tantamount to rape of a woman utterly preposterous, but it's a complete fucking insult to every person who has ever experienced sexual assault. Next morning regret does not equal rape.

Furthermore, by applying a strict code of conduct to the progression of sexual activity we reduce the spectrum of human sexuality to an incredibly constricted, vanilla affair with no regard to an individual's choices, desires and limits. The BDSM community engages safe words to counter situations where the submissive is being pushed to feel uncomfortable. Surely teaching people that it is OK to say 'no' and when someone says 'no', that no is a complete sentence and you need to stop what you are doing, is a more logical, simple and user friendly solution?
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-18-2018, 08:29 PM   #82
JasonClearwater
Literotica Guru
 
JasonClearwater is offline
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 931
Quote:
Originally Posted by ausfet View Post
Oh come on, we're all supposed to stay sober and straight (no drugs) for sex and we need to repeatedly seek express consent for every iota of sexual activity?

Not only is the idea that a drunk m/f couple happily agreeing to have a shag tantamount to rape of a woman utterly preposterous, but it's a complete fucking insult to every person who has ever experienced sexual assault. Next morning regret does not equal rape.

Furthermore, by applying a strict code of conduct to the progression of sexual activity we reduce the spectrum of human sexuality to an incredibly constricted, vanilla affair with no regard to an individual's choices, desires and limits. The BDSM community engages safe words to counter situations where the submissive is being pushed to feel uncomfortable. Surely teaching people that it is OK to say 'no' and when someone says 'no', that no is a complete sentence and you need to stop what you are doing, is a more logical, simple and user friendly solution?
There's 'happily agreeing' and being too off your tits to speak. What we're saying is, if your partner can't say yes, maybe don't shag them. Just a thought.

No-means-no is great. But do you really have to be stupified and raped to get that 'no' is not always possible to say? Is it not possible to understand how there are people men, women and children, who will at some point be faced with someone wanting to fuck them, and be too afraid, drunk or intimidated to be able to say 'get off me'? If you've made it this far without facing that situation, I envy you.

IF we teach kids from a young age that they need to actually gain positive consent, then the chances of them listening to a 'no' are higher. That's where I see this going.

We all know no teenager is going to keep asking 'do you want me to hold your hand now?'. But if they know that's what's expected, when they come across some unconscious girl lying on a couch, or a boy who's just finished puking in the toilets and is now half-asleep, maybe they'll think twice before attempting to fuck them.

If it's a case of two drunk people 'happily' fucking, then it shouldn't be hard to get a 'yes' from them. But I do think there's a bit of confusion on some people's part about what enthusiastic participation looks like, and it can't hurt to clear that up.

There's being against it being the law (and I agree, as a law, it'd be very difficult to manage and enforce, but as I say, the burden of proof right now is on the person who's claiming they've been raped, so nothing would be any different), and there's being against it as a concept. And as a concept, if I had kids, it's what I'd be teaching them. Keep checking in.

Your mention of BDSM is actually a great example of consent done well. In a healthy BDSM scene, everyone's already agree to their limits, has a safe word, and knows where they stand. Drunk at a party, a girl or a boy moaning no, and pushing your hand away, should have the same effect. But does it now? Not for a lot of people. And that's the problem. Unelsss the 'no' is accompanied by a punch to the face, it's often ignored in the heat of the moment. Change it to needing a yes, and you have more chance of that encounter being fully consensual, and less chance of that 'morning after' regret you mentioned.
__________________
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

I'm a leaf on the wind. Watch how I

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-18-2018, 09:23 PM   #83
ausfet
Really Experienced
 
ausfet is offline
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Australia
Posts: 171
I have kids, one who is above the Australian age of consent, and I can hand on my heart tell you that they are taught that 'no means no' in every circumstance that someone says it. It is a simple concept that stretches into every aspect of their lives, not just sex.

With regard to drunken sex, anyone with an iota of common decency knows screwing someone who's legless is wrong, but a) that is not what you were implying above and b) the concept of positive consent is lost on the people who take advantage of those who consent. Truly, if someone doesn't understand that having sex with someone who can't speak is wrong, then they are not going to grasp - or care - about positive consent.

I am genuinely sorry that you have been taken sexually assaulted. I have been there myself, and gone through the joys of the Australian legal system, so I appreciate how personally devastating these incidents are. My issue with positive consent is not what it's attempting to do, but what it does by default.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-19-2018, 01:10 AM   #84
Bramblethorn
Mallory Heart Surgeon.
 
Bramblethorn's Avatar
 
Bramblethorn is offline
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 7,627
Where are y'all getting this notion that positive consent means people being charged with rape for drunken hookups etc?

It's a straw man. Saying "X is problematic and we can do better" is not the same as "let's jail people for X".
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-19-2018, 01:13 AM   #85
SimonDoom
Literotica Guru
 
SimonDoom is offline
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: USA
Posts: 1,894
Quote:
Originally Posted by JasonClearwater View Post



The point is, behaviour needs to change..
Jason, I agree with pretty much everything you said above, with one possible exception, depending upon what you meant by the above statement.

If you mean that people's behavior should change so they do not engage in nonconsensual sex, then I agree. Sex should be consensual, period, and people, especially men, should be taught to be more aware of this so they are less prone to try to force nonconsensual sex on women.

But if you mean that law or policy should force or tell people to change the way they have consensual sex, at possible risk of criminal punishment if they do not, then I don't agree. It is not the business of law or rules to change people's consensual sexual behavior, in my opinion. Adults should be free to engage in consensual sexual behavior as they see fit.
__________________
My stories are at https://www.literotica.com/stories/m...ge=submissions.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-19-2018, 01:28 AM   #86
JasonClearwater
Literotica Guru
 
JasonClearwater is offline
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 931
Quote:
Originally Posted by SimonDoom View Post
Jason, I agree with pretty much everything you said above, with one possible exception, depending upon what you meant by the above statement.

If you mean that people's behavior should change so they do not engage in nonconsensual sex, then I agree. Sex should be consensual, period, and people, especially men, should be taught to be more aware of this so they are less prone to try to force nonconsensual sex on women.

But if you mean that law or policy should force or tell people to change the way they have consensual sex, at possible risk of criminal punishment if they do not, then I don't agree. It is not the business of law or rules to change people's consensual sexual behavior, in my opinion. Adults should be free to engage in consensual sexual behavior as they see fit.
No, I don't think the law should change. I see it more as a case of a societal attitude adjustment. The law is less effective at changing human behaviour, than the disapproval of your peers.
__________________
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

I'm a leaf on the wind. Watch how I

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-19-2018, 01:42 AM   #87
ausfet
Really Experienced
 
ausfet is offline
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Australia
Posts: 171
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bramblethorn View Post
Where are y'all getting this notion that positive consent means people being charged with rape for drunken hookups etc?

It's a straw man. Saying "X is problematic and we can do better" is not the same as "let's jail people for X".
Coastal Carolina University created a poster about 'Jake and Josie' hooking up while both were drunk, advising that Josie could not consent and thus rape occurred. There is a conviction amongst certain positive assent supporters - and I last saw someone supporting this on the weekend on Facebook but can't for the life of me find the community I saw it in - that because the male is penetrating, he is culpable even if both parties are equally inebriated and agreed to sex.

So no, not a straw man argument.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-19-2018, 09:38 AM   #88
Bramblethorn
Mallory Heart Surgeon.
 
Bramblethorn's Avatar
 
Bramblethorn is offline
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 7,627
Quote:
Originally Posted by ausfet View Post
Coastal Carolina University created a poster about 'Jake and Josie' hooking up while both were drunk, advising that Josie could not consent and thus rape occurred. There is a conviction amongst certain positive assent supporters - and I last saw someone supporting this on the weekend on Facebook but can't for the life of me find the community I saw it in - that because the male is penetrating, he is culpable even if both parties are equally inebriated and agreed to sex.

So no, not a straw man argument.
The poster you're referring to appears to have been used briefly in 2008, with about 20 printed, and not used since. So, yeah, real thing, and I'll agree that message is misguided.

That said, I'm not really convinced that one stupid poster published ten years ago in a small run by a couple of students is a strong argument against the concept as a whole. If this really was a widespread part of campus "affirmative assent" campaigns, surely there'd be some more prominent examples?

Re. the FB post you mention, worth remembering that one of the popular sports on 4chan is to fabricate exaggerated "SJW" material and try to pass it off as the genuine article as a way of smearing their opponents. Unless you've verified the identity of the original poster, it might be unwise to take it at face value.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-19-2018, 09:48 AM   #89
Sammael Bard
Suit Up
 
Sammael Bard's Avatar
 
Sammael Bard is offline
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Wherever I choose to be
Posts: 5,107
Not stupid, but the weirdest I've ever had was a bunch of garbled text. I mean just random "xcfhvfhbct".

Guess they were punching their keyboard in frustration.
__________________
Draw a picture of my soul and it'd be a scribble with fangs


AH Profile
My Stories and Erotic Art

Bard's Hideout [Construction in full swing]
My Fav Theme Song



  Reply With Quote

Old 02-19-2018, 10:14 AM   #90
8letters
Literotica Guru
 
8letters is offline
Join Date: May 2013
Location: USA
Posts: 873
First off, I think you're all missing the bigger point. A guy banging his 18 year old virgin sister - no problem; they're consenting adults. A guy and his girlfriend agreeing to positive approval for every step every time - now we're talking about something that's really offensive.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bramblethorn View Post
The poster you're referring to appears to have been used briefly in 2008, with about 20 printed, and not used since. So, yeah, real thing, and I'll agree that message is misguided.

That said, I'm not really convinced that one stupid poster published ten years ago in a small run by a couple of students is a strong argument against the concept as a whole.
I don't think it was stupid - it was poorly written. If she's so drunk that she can't consent, then it's rape in my book.

3 and 1/2 years ago, California passed the "Yes Means Yes" law. That (among other things) requires college and universities that receiving state funding to enact the following policy for their students:
Quote:
Originally Posted by SB-967
An affirmative consent standard in the determination of whether consent was given by both parties to sexual activity. “Affirmative consent” means affirmative, conscious, and voluntary agreement to engage in sexual activity. It is the responsibility of each person involved in the sexual activity to ensure that he or she has the affirmative consent of the other or others to engage in the sexual activity. Lack of protest or resistance does not mean consent, nor does silence mean consent. Affirmative consent must be ongoing throughout a sexual activity and can be revoked at any time. The existence of a dating relationship between the persons involved, or the fact of past sexual relations between them, should never by itself be assumed to be an indicator of consent.
I googled up the results of SB-967 and it appears to have had very little discernible impact. I don't know if that's because it's taking a long time to be fully implemented. The one article I found that mentioned an impact had the spokesman for a men's right group say that they've got more calls from parents in California that their son has been falsely accused of rape (but apparently not a whole lot more calls).
__________________
Blog on my writing.

Latest story - My Cookie-Baking Sister

Most popular stories - My European Summer Vacation, My Sister Set Me Up on a Blind Date and My Lingerie-Loving Sister Moves In
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-19-2018, 10:16 AM   #91
Bramblethorn
Mallory Heart Surgeon.
 
Bramblethorn's Avatar
 
Bramblethorn is offline
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 7,627
Quote:
Originally Posted by ausfet View Post
Oh come on, we're all supposed to stay sober and straight (no drugs) for sex and we need to repeatedly seek express consent for every iota of sexual activity?

Not only is the idea that a drunk m/f couple happily agreeing to have a shag tantamount to rape of a woman utterly preposterous, but it's a complete fucking insult to every person who has ever experienced sexual assault. Next morning regret does not equal rape.
Yeah, I don't think anybody in this thread was proposing that it is equivalent to rape.

Quote:
Furthermore, by applying a strict code of conduct to the progression of sexual activity we reduce the spectrum of human sexuality to an incredibly constricted, vanilla affair with no regard to an individual's choices, desires and limits. The BDSM community engages safe words to counter situations where the submissive is being pushed to feel uncomfortable. Surely teaching people that it is OK to say 'no' and when someone says 'no', that no is a complete sentence and you need to stop what you are doing, is a more logical, simple and user friendly solution?
I've been doing BDSM for a couple of decades now, and I can assure you that positive consent is a big part of it. Safewords are great but they shouldn't be seen as the only tool for managing consent in BDSM.

Very often people negotiate consent to BDSM activities in advance. That can be as formal as planning out a master-slave contrct, or as talking through the details of a scene, or as informal as "I'd like to hurt you"/"Yes, please!" It's also very common to continue that communication during the scene by checking in on one's plaything^Wpartner: "How are you doing?" "Mmm, good."

Safewords provide a method to withdraw consent, but they're not 100% reliable because sometimes people find it hard to say "no". If I recall correctly, Jay Wiseman's "SM 101" discusses an incident of that nature - he was playing with a new partner, she hadn't used her safeword but he was getting uncomfortable vibes from her, so he explicitly asked her if she was okay and she said no.

I'd also note that many BDSMers avoid mixing alcohol with BDSM play, especially with new partners, precisely because we understand that it can impede communication and consent.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-19-2018, 10:25 AM   #92
Bramblethorn
Mallory Heart Surgeon.
 
Bramblethorn's Avatar
 
Bramblethorn is offline
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 7,627
Quote:
Originally Posted by 8letters View Post
First off, I think you're all missing the bigger point. A guy banging his 18 year old virgin sister - no problem; they're consenting adults. A guy and his girlfriend agreeing to positive approval for every step every time - now we're talking about something that's really offensive.
Especially if they're using a condom.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-19-2018, 06:27 PM   #93
JennaMonroe
Experienced
 
JennaMonroe is offline
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 40
"Rape" in non-consent category. Also, there was an established safe word!
__________________
~Jen

Free Lit Stories

Smashwords

Amazon
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:41 AM.

Copyright 1998-2013 Literotica Online. Literotica is a registered trademark.