Your web-browser is very outdated, and as such, this website may not display properly. Please consider upgrading to a modern, faster and more secure browser. Click here to do so.
This Time article on consent education is literally the worst combination of “but what about the men?!” and “not all men!” with the bonus “consent is too hard.”
An oft’ repeated argument by the anti-abortion sect is that “consent to sex is consent to pregnancy”. This ignores the concept of ongoing consent. When an action is not a single action, but an ongoing situation, it requires ongoing consent. I know the application of this concept to pregnancy is one not often considered, but it is fully applicable.
So let’s break this down into the simplest form I can produce- a basic syllogism.
- Does an ongoing action, condition or situation require ongoing consent? The law and common sense say yes.
- Is pregnancy an ongoing condition, action or situation? Yes.
- Therefore, pregnancy requires ongoing consent.
So even if the action of sexual intercourse itself is consent to pregnancy (which I personally disagree with, but that is not the topic at hand) the action of continuing to stay pregnant requires ongoing consent. If that consent is withdrawn, so too must the action of continuing to stay pregnant end.
A parallel I have used in the past is the one most commonly associated with the concept of ongoing consent: sex. If my SO and I are getting sexy, and I decide, for whatever reason, be it convinience, mental state, health-related, my period, or just not feeling it any more, that I don’t want to continue having sex, and I communicate this to him, he is obliged to stop. If he does not, that is rape.
According to the logic that anti-abortion types use, because I consented before the sexual experience began, I have no right withdrawing that consent in the middle of the sexual experience. Any logical, feeling person will see how that is not okay. Pregnancy is ongoing. And for pregnancy to continue, my consent must also continue.
it turns out a friend of some of my friends won’t take any form of no as an answer from women when he’s blackout drunk besides literal punches to the face. he hasn’t raped anybody that i know of, but he does extended following, aggressive cornering, unwanted touching, turning rejection into flirting, and he forced my friend to make out with him until she could get away. how do i negotiate talking to him about his behavior and continuing to operate within a group of friends that he’s nonnegotiably part of?
Normally I prefer not to respond to submissions this sloppy, but your underlying question is too important to ignore. What you’re asking is how to deal with a person in your sphere of friends who becomes inappropriately sexual and physically aggressive when he’s intoxicated.
If I was in your shoes, I’d first build a coalition within the group. I would speak individually to each friend I knew would support me, and I’d get them to agree that the guy’s behavior is inappropriate and should no longer be tolerated.
Spread the responsibility for monitoring his behavior around to as many people in your group of friends as possible. Make sure they understand that it’s a problem that needs correcting, and that it’s okay for them to actually do something to correct it.
As for talking directly to the guy, don’t wait until he’s drunk and acting up before you have the discussion with him. Sit him down when he’s sober and let him know that he can’t continue to behave that way. Shoot him straight. Tell him exactly what he’s done wrong and why he can’t continue behaving that way.
After you’ve had the talk with him, if he continues acting inappropriately, that’s when you call him out in front of the group. Use shame as your tool to alter his behavior when he’s drunk.
Captain Awkward wrote a detailed post about this, for anyone who wants more advice on dealing with the “creepy guy” in their social group: My Friend Group Has A Case of the “Creepy Dude.”
Basically, stop worrying about hurting their feelings, because someone else’s safety depends on your intervention.
IF YOU BLAME YOUNG GIRLS FOR NOT KNOWING HOW TO REACT TO UNWELCOME SEXUAL ADVANCES FROM ADULT MEN I WILL DESTROY YOU, I WILL ERADICATE EVERY PROTON THAT COMPRISES YOUR WORTHLESS BODY, HOW DARE YOU
and for those dumb fucks out there who cant quite get it
a girl saying “im 17 (or any age that is under 18)” is saying “please stop”
its really scary how some of yall dont understand that
If you don’t understand this, best case scenario is you’re terrible in bed. Worst case scenario is you’re a rapist. Get it straight.
a man and women are dating, the woman gets pregnant. option 1) mom doesnt want the baby/cant afford it, gets an abortion, every one is cool ('cept dad who is heartbroken and wasnt apart of the deciscion) option 2) dad doesnt want the baby/cant afford it, mom does. dad drugs mom and kills the baby w/o hurting mom. everyone freaks out, dad is convicted of murder and imprisoned. double standard
This is not a double standard.
It is a violation of bodily autonomy to force someone to have an abortion, no matter how much you don’t want them to have a baby. Forced pregnancy and forced abortions are both violations of bodily autonomy and they are both wrong for that reason. (Especially drugging someone. What the hell? Drugging someone is wrong even if it “doesn’t hurt” them.)
While pregnancy is a result of sex between two people, pregnancy only happens to one person’s body. What the pregnant person decides is what matters. It is okay and normal to feel sad if they choose abortion when you would have liked a baby or vice versa - it is not okay to think that you should be in control of someone else’s body and force them through either pregnancy or an abortion.
Everyone is “cool” with it when the pregnant person chooses an abortion because abortion and the pro-choice position are about choice. No pro-choice person advocates for forced abortion or forced birth.
When I pass my boards and officially become a nurse, I’m (legally and ethically) not allowed to just drug people because I feel a certain way. Therefore, why should this guy be allowed to?
Inducing a miscarriage is harmful, even if it’s safe. It’s hours of heavy bleeding, painful cramping, nausea/puking, chills, and diarrhea, not to mention the emotional and mental strain (especially if someone is miscarrying against their wishes) and the risk of infection if gone unsupervised by medical personnel. That anon could believe medication abortion has no effect on a pregnant person really speaks to how ignorant they are, and how inconsequential they consider that person’s humanity.
I believe I’ve seen a comprehensive description of consent once before. Figured I’d contribute as it’s a subject that bears repeating.
- Non-coercive: If you’re cojoling, threatening or otherwise trying to “convince” someone to engage in a sexual act with you, you are breaking consent. If you asked 16 times and got 15 No’s and 1 Yes, you still did not adequately obtain consent. Also, you’re a weak individual.
- Not fixed: What I mean by this is you shouldn’t take for granted that after asking once for consent that you now have consent forever. It’s not like landing a gig as a Supreme Court judge. You don’t have consent for life. It should be continuously negotiated.
- Dynamic: Related to the above note, consent for one act does not necessitate consent for all acts. Consent is not an EZ Pass. It should be re-addressed constantly for different acts.
- Conscious: Yeah, I want to believe I don’t have to explain this one. Bad enough I had to list it. But ok, yes, an inebriated/asleep/passed out or otherwise not fully coherent person cannot consent. There, you can’t say no one ever told you.
- Unambiguous/Explicit: Assume all of the following to mean “no.” — “Maybe,” “I’m not sure,” “Not yet,” “Kinda,” “Wait a minute,” …I could go on.
- Not contingent upon sexual interest nor sexual arousal: We know. Blue balls are a motherfucker. Still no excuse. Neither your NOR the expressed/implied interest of any potential partners is an invitation to any act. Also, neither your nor the (assumed) arousal of anyone you might want to have sex with is an invitation. Yes, someone might be aroused and still not want to fuck. Crazy times. I know.
- Not compensatory: Yeah, that dinner and a movie were nice. Still not an invitation to fuck. And if you thought it was, you’re a world class asshole.
- Not something that requires a qualifier: No one needs to explain why they are not granting you consent. No is enough.
Page 1 of 4