Postive Consent in a story

[8letters]

In case you haven't heard, California passed a law requiring universities to develop policies requiring affirmative consent ongoing through out a sexual activity. I would think that would be required EVERY TIME two people have sex. I'm working on a brother-sister story where the brother has just come out of a relationship where the woman required affirmative consent every time. I decided that the only way it would work is if the couple developed different gestures/signals to request and give permission. For example, if the guy wanted to touch the girl's crotch, he'd put the palm of his hand on her belly button with his fingers pointed to her crotch. If she agreed, she would spread her legs. I wrote several more into my story and decided it wasn't interesting enough and ripped it out. I tried to write affirmative consent into the story and I couldn't pull it off - there were times when one character moved onto the next step in the sexual activity while feverishly kissing the the other person.

Has anyone written a story where both characters gave affirmative consent throughout the sexual activity?

 

[loquere]

In case you haven't heard, California passed a law requiring universities to develop policies requiring affirmative consent ongoing through out a sexual activity. I would think that would be required EVERY TIME two people have sex. I'm working on a brother-sister story where the brother has just come out of a relationship where the woman required affirmative consent every time. I decided that the only way it would work is if the couple developed different gestures/signals to request and give permission. For example, if the guy wanted to touch the girl's crotch, he'd put the palm of his hand on her belly button with his fingers pointed to her crotch. If she agreed, she would spread her legs. I wrote several more into my story and decided it wasn't interesting enough and ripped it out. I tried to write affirmative consent into the story and I couldn't pull it off - there were times when one character moved onto the next step in the sexual activity while feverishly kissing the the other person.

Has anyone written a story where both characters gave affirmative consent throughout the sexual activity?

Only one story where I have both characters being loudly verbal to each other. Enticing each other etc. In most of my other stories consent is implied.

 

[Bramblethorn]

I try to model affirmative and negotiated consent in my stories (well, the non-horror ones... although sometimes even there) but it doesn't have to be a formal thing. e.g. from my latest:

"I want to kiss you. So much."

"What are you waiting for?"

... "Just kissing tonight, OK? I need to take this slow."

My "Counting To Eleven" has a somewhat more formal discussion, because the two people don't know one another as well: https://www.literotica.com/s/counting-to-eleven?page=2

In both those stories I aimed to make the consent part of the flirtation/foreplay; it doesn't have to be the enemy of sexiness.

Consent doesn't always have to be verbal, either. If I say "I want you" and she responds by undressing and beckoning me into bed, that's a form of consent, though we might still need to discuss the details.

 

[sr71plt]

Unless you got a contract written up with a lawyer beforehand or created a paper trail some other way, how does one prove there was positive consent if the other player decides afterward there wasn't? This whole issue is a slippery slope--and I certainly wouldn't be limited by it in story writing.

I generally establish an "I want it, even if it scares me to say so" in my character's mind, but that's more to cut out the need for a lot of development in the story. I think those hung up on the consent issue should stick with reading and writing erotica light--and maybe go looking for a Web site with a lot more limits than this one has.

 

[Ldy_Sea]

Affirmitive consent in colleges has been around since at least the mid 80's. At least then when I first heard bout it after a rape of a co ed.

It never works and like most feel good actions taken after a tragedy it's too little too late, solves nothing but makes teh weak minded feel like they did something.

If consent can be withdrawn anytime, what difference does affirmative consent make?

 

[HandsInTheDark]

Consent was already required. This sounds like a political move to convince parents that Steps Have Been Taken. And how does it help? Rape is under-reported because girls tend not to report, and when they do it becomes a he said/she said battle. How does this change that?

I can imagine the new tease/denial game it will generate though.

"May I touch you... here?"
"Yes."
"Mm. Then how about... here?"
"Yes!"
"And may I rub this... there?"
"Yes! Damnit! Just do me already! Stop asking shit!"
"Tsk. That wouldn't be legal. Now we have to start over."

 

[Ldy_Sea]

If you watch the Simpsons, there was a flashback episode where Marge was in College before she married Homer, and she was dating a professor. In hiis apartment he asked about kissing and the list went on.

I remember in the 80's the college in question had rules like any individual who would like to be intimate with another person or other persons must gain consent from all other participants before any escalation of the intimacy.

There was an uproar because people said the school was promoting group sex, others said that it was ridiculous to ask, may I hold your hand. May I kiss your cheek. May I kiss your lips. May I kiss you while sticking my tongue in your mouth. May i fondle your breast. May I remove your shirt. May I kiss your belly.

Which is exactly what the policy required. Students, including the girls said hell no it would kill romance and spontaneity.

 

[NotWise]

When and where I went to college we were considered to be adults and the school had no rules--other than those written into State and Federal law--that governed the behavior of adults.

I remember reading (when I was in high school) a book by a retired judge. It was about the legal definition of rape. Most cases are clear, but the variations make it very difficult to define or regulate.

 

[sr71plt]

I don't think any residential college has the luxury anymore.

 

[HandsInTheDark]

others said that it was ridiculous to ask, may I hold your hand. May I kiss your cheek....

Which is exactly what the policy required. Students, including the girls said hell no it would kill romance and spontaneity.

Not to mention what it implies about girls, viz., we can't trust you to articulate your preferred stopping point, if any, so we must break down seduction and/or foreplay into small, manageable steps you can cope with, one at a time.

It just makes no sense mechanically; the point of making out is the intricate dance between going too slow and going too fast, and the shifting limits, and the final, sometimes highly impromptu decision on when to stop things (or not). That's most of the fun. Either none of the legislators ever made out with anyone in their lives, or, they don't want anyone else to.

Realistically I know what it's probably aimed at: the problem of girls who don't say no, largely because they're too drunk to articulate refusal. If she's too drunk to give a definitive no, she's too drunk to give a definitive yes, which under these new rules means activity stops. My guess is this rule can only and will only be employed against guys who were playing "but she didn't say no!" card on the drunks. That's all well and good, but when you craft a law over-broadly, and then only use it in the circumstances you're really trying to control, you inevitably end up with trouble.

Some girls are very turned on by sexually aggressive guys (clue: every bodice-ripper ever). I can imagine the new turn-on is going to be "oh my gosh he kissed me and didn't ask first. Oooh, so reckless!" Just the opposite of the intended result...

 

[NotWise]

I don't think any residential college has the luxury anymore.

As an undergraduate I went to a very small engineering school that didn't have (or need) its own security staff, so they didn't make up their own rules. Bigger schools had their own security staff and that led to them making their own rules. I think that's now really part of their marketing strategy. "We have a safe, secure campus."

Last summer at the local University we had a case where a woman living on campus agreed on line to have sex with someone she didn't otherwise know. By her account it was on the condition that he wore a condom. He got there and when things got hot he refused to use a condom. She called campus security and claimed rape.

I don't know what the prosecutors did. If I were the prosecutor that case would not waste much public time or money. I don't recall that it surfaced again.

 

[Bramblethorn]

Unless you got a contract written up with a lawyer beforehand or created a paper trail some other way, how does one prove there was positive consent if the other player decides afterward there wasn't? This whole issue is a slippery slope--and I certainly wouldn't be limited by it in story writing.

Burden of proof runs in the other direction: you have to prove there wasn't consent, e.g. if one person was unconscious at the time.

 

[Bramblethorn]

Last summer at the local University we had a case where a woman living on campus agreed on line to have sex with someone she didn't otherwise know. By her account it was on the condition that he wore a condom. He got there and when things got hot he refused to use a condom. She called campus security and claimed rape.

Well, yeah. If you give conditional consent, and somebody refuses to honour those conditions, that's rape. This isn't a difficult concept, though it may be difficult to prove.

If you agree to a boxing match, the other guy gets to hit you in the ring, with gloved fists, for the duration of that match. If he punches you in the street afterwards, or brings a baseball bat into the match, that's assault (or in USA, battery) because that wasn't part of the agreement.

 

[sr71plt]

I don't know how long ago you went to college, but sexual assault is a major issue on campuses now. I live practically on the grounds of UVa, and it's recently been hit as having the fifth largest number of incidents reported annually (36) of rape on the grounds (we don't have a campus; we have grounds) and is throwing major effort at it. And this is after the Rolling Stones discredited article about a gang rape at a fraternity house and all the publicity that brought. I'll bet that sexual assault is getting a priority of attention of the University administration (we also cap "the University") right behind sports (so you know how seriously they're taking it) and before new building construction and safety on the grounds, with, of course, education coming in a poor fifth for attention. I wouldn't be surprised if every other residential college was in the same panic mode on sexual assault.

The kicker, of course, is in the great difficulty in getting to the truth of consensual/nonconsensual/regretted the morning after coupling in a promiscuous society. The Stanford case was actually an easy one to figure out--two guys pulled the guy off an incapacitated woman and chased him down. Most cases aren't that clear-cut, and as clear-cut as the Stanford case was, it didn't get instructive results.

 

[Hypoxia]

Affirmative consent goes way back.

In the entertaining autobiography HARPO SPEAKS, Harpo Marx tells of snooping on actor and legendary cocksman John Barrymore to learn the great lothario's pickup techniques. Barrymore leered at his comely target and asked, "Hey baby, wanna fuck?" A 'yes' to that is affirmative consent, hey? (And 'no' means she'll never work in Hollywood again.)

I'll separate "simple consent" from "informed consent". If they agree to sex without knowing all that's coming, what's their recourse? He asks, "Wanna fuck?" She nods agreement. He opens the door on the three big-donged Bolivian dwarves. What's she to do?

 

[NotWise]

Well, yeah. If you give conditional consent, and somebody refuses to honour those conditions, that's rape. This isn't a difficult concept, though it may be difficult to prove.

If you agree to a boxing match, the other guy gets to hit you in the ring, with gloved fists, for the duration of that match. If he punches you in the street afterwards, or brings a baseball bat into the match, that's assault (or in USA, battery) because that wasn't part of the agreement.

The biggest problem in a case like this isn't with questions of law or fact, but with where public money will be spent prosecuting cases. This was a questionable situation where the facts of the case would be disputed. He said... She said... We have actual victims in real crimes that need to be prosecuted.

A case like this is more like contract violation than it is like rape.

 

[Bramblethorn]

A case like this is more like contract violation than it is like rape.

Those things are not mutually exclusive.

If I contract to build a bridge to certain safety standards, and I cut corners and people are killed when the bridge collapses, it's contract violation and it is also manslaughter. etc. etc.

 

[Bramblethorn]

I'll separate "simple consent" from "informed consent". If they agree to sex without knowing all that's coming, what's their recourse? He asks, "Wanna fuck?" She nods agreement. He opens the door on the three big-donged Bolivian dwarves. What's she to do?

Yep. We had a couple of cases in Australia recently where football teams assumed that a woman consenting to sleep with one of the team extended to consent to any of his teammates.

People who are concerned about affirmative consent cramping their sex lives... maybe ought to think about how often women are already saying "no" to stuff they do want, because "yes" risks being taken as carte blanche.

 

[sr71plt]

The biggest problem in a case like this isn't with questions of law or fact, but with where public money will be spent prosecuting cases.

I don't think so. I think the biggest problem is proving what the truth of the consent/nonconsent is.

 

[NotWise]

I don't think so. I think the biggest problem is proving what the truth of the consent/nonconsent is.

I had the most learned, reasonable and obviously indisputable response to all of this and hit "Submit Reply." Then for some damned reason I had to log back in again. When I logged back in again my very astute response was gone.

See? Now the technical glitches have prevented all of you from achieving higher levels of enlightenment.

 

[Boxlicker101]

Except for the Non-consent/Reluctant category, I let the actions of the characters say they want it.

 

[Handley_Page]

In case you haven't heard, California passed a law requiring universities to develop policies requiring affirmative consent ongoing through out a sexual activity. I would think that would be required EVERY TIME two people have sex. I'm working on a brother-sister story where the brother has just come out of a relationship where the woman required affirmative consent every time. I decided that the only way it would work is if the couple developed different gestures/signals to request and give permission. For example, if the guy wanted to touch the girl's crotch, he'd put the palm of his hand on her belly button with his fingers pointed to her crotch. If she agreed, she would spread her legs. I wrote several more into my story and decided it wasn't interesting enough and ripped it out. I tried to write affirmative consent into the story and I couldn't pull it off - there were times when one character moved onto the next step in the sexual activity while feverishly kissing the the other person.

Has anyone written a story where both characters gave affirmative consent throughout the sexual activity?

As in "sign Language" ?

 

[HandsInTheDark]

I don't know how long ago you went to college, but sexual assault is a major issue on campuses now....I'll bet that sexual assault is getting a priority of attention of the University administration (we also cap "the University") right behind sports (so you know how seriously they're taking it) and before new building construction and safety on the grounds, with, of course, education coming in a poor fifth for attention. I wouldn't be surprised if every other residential college was in the same panic mode on sexual assault.

They pretty much are.

Which is bizarre. Rape is illegal and a matter for police. You can argue that police don't handle rape cases well,. but at least they have no inherent motivation to distort facts. Administrators have every reason in the world to try to keep rape quiet, and when the rapist is a prized athlete and the victim is some no-account communications major, you can guess how it's going to go. Some schools have overreacted and started treating accusations as convictions, to be seen as more progressive. That creates other problems. Schools can't handle rape impartially because they are far too invested in their own reputations. And it's not their job anyway. We have a legal system and this is what it is for.

You'll know schools are serious about rape when alcohol is banned from campuses and aggressive monitoring is done. It's difficult to implement, but if you make it clear that if you're found drunk on campus twice you will be expelled, you'd see rape plummet.

The kicker, of course, is in the great difficulty in getting to the truth of consensual/nonconsensual/regretted the morning after coupling in a promiscuous society.

This.

Put encrypted cameras everywhere on campus, including in dorm rules. On an accusation, get a court order to get the video record decrypted and have police review the footage. You used force after she said no or tried to leave? Instant conviction, ten year minimum. It happened off campus? Not the school's problem; take it to the police. Problems solved.

 

[Bramblethorn]

Which is bizarre. Rape is illegal and a matter for police. You can argue that police don't handle rape cases well,. but at least they have no inherent motivation to distort facts.

Police departments are assessed by KPIs. Open cases look bad for KPIs, which provides a motivation to prevent difficult-to-close cases (like rape) from being opened in the first place, or to close them by whatever means.

Combine that with the fact that the average PD is 87% male, and the usual biases people carry around, and yes, police DO distort facts, regardless of whether they have an "inherent motivation" to do so. Crap like this: https://www.propublica.org/article/false-rape-accusations-an-unbelievable-story

Schools can't handle rape impartially because they are far too invested in their own reputations. And it's not their job anyway. We have a legal system and this is what it is for.

False dichotomy. Employers, schools etc. have a legal responsibility to look out for the safety of their people. Law enforcement also have a responsibility - which is largely to respond after things go wrong - but that doesn't negate a school's responsibility to prevent things from going wrong in the first place.

You'll know schools are serious about rape when alcohol is banned from campuses and aggressive monitoring is done. It's difficult to implement, but if you make it clear that if you're found drunk on campus twice you will be expelled, you'd see rape plummet.

... Or you'd displace the problem to off-campus and give victims even more reason to be scared of reporting. You might well see reported rape go down but that's not actually a solution.

People like to get drunk. (Personally I don't get the attraction but I've seen enough to convince me that it's a popular human pastime.) We have an awful lot of history to show that prohibition is not an effective way of preventing that, only of pushing it underground where it's harder to manage the harms it does.

Put encrypted cameras everywhere on campus, including in dorm rules. On an accusation, get a court order to get the video record decrypted and have police review the footage. You used force after she said no or tried to leave? Instant conviction, ten year minimum. It happened off campus? Not the school's problem; take it to the police. Problems solved.

Given the extremely long record of police accusing current powers to snoop on people illegally, I'm not sure that giving them total surveillance powers over college campuses is a great idea. And what stops somebody from switching out the police cam for one of their own?

The national backlog of unprocessed rape kits should be a clue that technology alone doesn't solve problems like this.

 

[Carnal_Flower]

Im not responsible for that rape, it was the drinking and the promiscuous party culture that's to blame.

Reminds me of all the people who think banning video games will stop gun violence.