Share this comment
It is missing from social interactions, which is dismal.
I am realizing that you are perhaps referencing a specific doctrine that I am unfamiliar with. Researching consent doctrine I am finding things about age of consent and medical consent doctrines. I do not see a consent doctrine around sexual activity. Could you share your source?
It is missing from social interactions, which is dismal.
I am realizing that you are perhaps referencing a specific doctrine that I am unfamiliar with. Researching consent doctrine I am finding things about age of consent and medical consent doctrines. I do not see a consent doctrine around sexual activity. Could you share your source?
Affirmative Consent
Affirmative Consent is defined as the act of willingly and verbally agreeing to engage in specific sexual conduct. The following are clarifying points: Affirmative Consent must be obtained each and every time there is sexual activity.
AFFIRMATIVE CONSENT understanding of the sexual activity:
The person who initiates sexual conduct is responsible for verbally asking for the affirmative consent of individual(s) involved.
The person with whom sexual conduct is initiated must verbally express affirmative consent or lack of “consent.”
Each new level of sexual activity requires affirmative consent.
Use of agreed upon forms of communication such as gestures or safe words is acceptable but must be discussed and verbally agreed to by all parties before sexual activity occurs.
Affirmative Consent is required regardless of the parties’ relationship, prior sexual history, or current activity (e.g. grinding on the dance floor is not consent for further sexual activity).
In order for affirmative consent to be valid, all parties must have unimpaired judgment and a shared understanding of the nature of the act to which they are consenting, including the use of safer sex practices.
A person cannot give affirmative consent while sleeping.
Silence conveys a lack of affirmative consent.
At any and all times when affirmative consent is withdrawn or not explicitly agreed to, the sexual activity must stop immediately.
All parties must disclose personal risk factors and known STIs.
https://antiochcollege.edu/campus-life/sexual-offense-prevention-policy-title-ix/
<< Each new level of sexual activity requires affirmative consent. >>
What exactly is a "level of sexual activity"? First base, second base, etc? What if your left foot is your most erogenous zone? Do you have to declare that?
Also, this set of regulations would prohibit sexual contact between people who do not speak the same language. Would they need to hire a translator?
during the "metoo" travesty, it became apparent that someone could be "metooed" for seeking affirmative consent. Under the "metoo doctrine," mere sexual speech became tantamount to rape or assault, for the purposes of destroying a man's reputation or career, by which I do NOT mean harassment but rather making a friendly pass. So this was a typical wanting it both ways double bind for men: do not seek consent and you're finished. Seek consent and it's just as bad, if she says it is. This is why the whole concept is a trap.
Horrific indeed. I'm not even a man and I've been terrified to flirt most of the time because of the ideology around sexual harassment over the past few years. I was actually given a "how dare you" from a man that I flirted with that I knew for a fact was attracted to me because he told me he was interested. We were both attracted to one another but he felt betrayed somehow. That really shut me down to men for a long time.
I can not imagine the stress that takes men to, because this nonsense is mostly geared towards men.
OK - looking at a few articles on the Antioch Sexual Offense prevention policy, I am very familiar with this attitude. There are people that feel that a brief touch to someones arm or shoulder that was not previously discussed and consented to is a microaggression or possibly even assault.
so now we may ask: what is the effect of that environment (rather than the stated intent)?
Is that stifling effect perhaps the hidden intent?!
"the effect is the intent" — eric mcluhan
"consent doctrine" is my own term.
By it I mean the pseudo feminist concept of "consent" that you might trace back to the Antioch College rules of the early 1990s -- an essential historical reference point in this discussion.
It was a hot topic just as i was thrown back into the world of singles, already dealing with the AIDS scare narrative, a fraud in hindsight but almost everyone believed it back then, even my radical political circles.