Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Consent is not the be-all and end-all

334 replies

MagicMix · 18/01/2019 11:14

Following on from the thread about the impact of porn and other threads about the implausibility of consent to brutal practices.

The focus on sexual consent in feminism in recent years has been positive to a certain extent but I think we have lost nuance when we consider consent to be the key to sexual ethics.

Consent is not a green light for whatever you want, it is the bare minimum. Sex without consent is obviously very wrong (rape or sexual assault). And most feminists have at least some understanding that coerced consent is a problem and does not equate to true consent, although some seem unable to understand that paying someone is clear-cut coercion.

But we have to go further. Consent does not make everything all right. There are some things that can never be all right and the anti-kink-shaming 'sex-positive' thinking that refuses to condemn anything as long as someone is getting sexually aroused by it has led us down some very dark paths.

If you can stomach it, here is an article about a woman who claims to be sexually aroused by being waterboarded.
www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/waterboarding-kink-sex-bdsm-torture-779066/
Now I don't believe her and my personal opinion is that the M is BDSM is a form of self-harm, but really that is not the main point. The point is, somebody did that to her because she asked for it. People are quite literally torturing other people in the pursuit of sexual pleasure and we are expected to be non-judgmental.

The point is that the S in BDSM is sick and wrong. It was said on the other thread that we need to bring back kink shaming. Yes a thousand times. They can call me a prude, frigid, accuse me of being in a moral panic, I don't care. If someone gets sexual pleasure from hurting people, torturing people, acting out scenarios that put them in the role of rapist or slave-owner, I think that person has an unhealthy, dangerous sexuality and should seek help. It should not be accepted uncritically as harmless just because there was consent.

OP posts:
FlyingOink · 18/01/2019 21:54

This is so obvious when you have watched it regularly and then stop agreed, especially if you stop because you're having a fulfilling sexual relationship with someone else.
The whole NoFap thing might focus on men's enjoyment but it is very interesting to note how they describe sex (and masturbation sans porn) once they have regained their normal sexual response.
I think it's possible for porn-sick women to regain that normal sexual response but it's not a given, as the damage is more psychological than physical.

MagicMix · 18/01/2019 21:46

Women got to the stage they would completely dissociate

I think dissociation is basically universal amongst prostitutes, isn't it? How else could anyone possibly deal with the experience? Have you read Rachel Moran's Paid For? It should be required reading for everybody, can't recommend it highly enough.

Porn definitely shapes sexual desire, as well as reframing what is acceptable.

This is so obvious when you have watched it regularly and then stop. Always the people arguing that this is false are people who are still watching it. If they would quit for just a year they would realise how wrong they are. It's completely impossible to comment objectively on something that is still pervading your consciousness so strongly.

Though I am sad to say I believe my sexuality has been permanently damaged by porn in some ways. I don't think I will ever completely get those images out my head.

OP posts:
FlyingOink · 18/01/2019 21:36

What I've taken from this is that at the moment women's lives and health and agency are worth nothing. I do wonder if they were somehow monetised in the way you suggest if that might raise the profile of women as fully formed worthy people.
I think many men don't think women's lives, health and agency are worthy of active consideration. It doesn't cross their mind to care. Again something that stood out in the interviews with punters on some of the prostitution articles. They didn't give the women and girls a second thought.

FlyingOink · 18/01/2019 21:33

I actually feel extremely lucky that my early sexual partners didn't ask me to do something like anal or choking because I have a horrible feeling that I would have said yes, even though those are definitely not things I have any desire to try.
And sadly women and girls who subsume their own desires like this and partake in activities they aren't genuinely happy about seem to do more and more psychological damage to themselves.
I was reading a lot on prostitution last night because of the related thread and it was a common complaint. Women got to the stage they would completely dissociate, and were unable to become genuinely intimate with anyone.
Porn definitely shapes sexual desire, as well as reframing what is acceptable. It's pervasive and morally bankrupt.

thefirstmrsdewinter · 18/01/2019 21:32

'here' = on the MN boards.

thefirstmrsdewinter · 18/01/2019 21:30

Hence my insurance idea; disinterested men would get on board with making "perverts" pay for their hobbies, I'm sure. What I've taken from this is that at the moment women's lives and health and agency are worth nothing. I do wonder if they were somehow monetised in the way you suggest if that might raise the profile of women as fully formed worthy people.
What I read over and over here is that women are often not sure what constitutes violence and abuse so might not attach much importance to protection.

FlyingOink · 18/01/2019 21:28

thefirstmrsdewinter no I guessed that but I wasn't going to reply as a vegetarian or as a meat-eater; people's buying habits suggest welfare isn't even a consideration for some shoppers.

MagicMix · 18/01/2019 21:26

What sort of impact does that have on your confidence and sense of self?

A really bad impact, I can tell you from personal experience. I watched porn from my mid-teens to my early twenties and although I never went so far as to believe that brutal acts were normal or sexy (I did my best to seek out gentler porn) and I believed myself to possess enough critical awareness to not be affected by it, I was deeply affected, in ways I am still realising to this day.

I essentially began my sex life with the subconscious belief that sex was for men, male sexual pleasure was more important than female sexual pleasure, female sexual pleasure was in fact inconsequential, female sexual desire existed only as a response to male sexual desire, female sexuality was submissive. I stress that I would never have said I thought any of those things - I would have strongly disagreed with them. I would have been able to logically argue against all these statements and rationalise that they were wrong, but I still believed them deep down, I actually really believed that I didn't deserve sex that was mutually pleasurable. I'm sure porn doesn't account for all of that, but it sure as fuck didn't help. I actually feel extremely lucky that my early sexual partners didn't ask me to do something like anal or choking because I have a horrible feeling that I would have said yes, even though those are definitely not things I have any desire to try.

I want to make it absolutely clear that I no longer watch porn and I now believe it to be deeply unethical - it was presented to me as normal and something that everyone does to the extent that the little voice of unease saying 'something's not right here' was essentially silenced. I am ashamed of my past actions which I now realise made me complicit in the suffering of women. How I wish I had received any kind of porn-critical education at all as a teenager.

OP posts:
thefirstmrsdewinter · 18/01/2019 21:23

Flying I made that assumption because I'm that person, but I accept it doesn't apply across the board. I wasn't really applying morality though, more the assumption that if the animal has a nice(r) life then that sort of ameliorates the harm done to them.
You may not object to eating meat but I don't think you can deny that harm comes to the animal eaten. :)

FlyingOink · 18/01/2019 21:23

I think it's hard to force people to care, basically.
And men taking advantage of what they learned in porn to brutalise women and girls have no consequences to consider; those who object to it personally or find that behaviour distasteful still have no skin in the game really.
Hence my insurance idea; disinterested men would get on board with making "perverts" pay for their hobbies, I'm sure.

Iused2BanOptimist · 18/01/2019 21:22

sadly the author did say (paraphrasing) that she felt women wanted to be dominated and that explained the success of the book.
Well she would say that wouldn't she (apologies Mandy Rice-Davies). She had a book to sell and her literary reputation to defend. Grin

thefirstmrsdewinter · 18/01/2019 21:21

Must be a problem with my keyboard
Maybe a problem with my screen.
Oh false alarm, I've got the weaker readers on, that's Rickman alright.

FlyingOink · 18/01/2019 21:19

I did have the thought that BDSM is like free-range meat, that because you've assessed the conditions and are satisfied they're better than the battery/factory alternative, you're fooling yourself no harm has been done, but the animal still dies in the end so you can eat it.
The problem with that analogy is the assumption that most people have a moral objection to eating meat, and mitigate this objection through insisting on decent abattoir standards.
Whereas unless battery eggs are banned, there's always a market for them and blind factory farmed chickens because they're cheap.

FlyingOink · 18/01/2019 21:15

Is it wrong that I heard that in a Hollywood drill instructor voice?
I'm pretty sure I typed it in "Alan Rickman baddie" not "drill instructor".
Must be a problem with my keyboard Confused

thefirstmrsdewinter · 18/01/2019 21:15

'Don't kid yourself. If they could find a way to get the public to believe those animals consented, they'd do the same to the animals.' I did have the thought that BDSM is like free-range meat, that because you've assessed the conditions and are satisfied they're better than the battery/factory alternative, you're fooling yourself no harm has been done, but the animal still dies in the end so you can eat it.

FlyingOink · 18/01/2019 21:12

Gonna disagree. There are WAY many more animal lovers than women-lovers.
Maybe but there are plenty of cases of deliberate animal abuse (as opposed to criminal neglect) such as dog fighting, badger baiting, tying a dog to a tree and beating it, bestiality, etc and the perpetrators in the news are always male.
A generation of boys who grew up on bestgore.com and rotten.com will watch animal abuse.
If there was a way to monetise that further through manufacturing animals' consent it would happen.

Earlywalker · 18/01/2019 21:12

FlyingOink I have never reported anyone on MN until tonight where someone reported my post for a clearly sarcastic message and MNHQ saw fit to delete it despite the constant endorsement of ‘free speech’ so they’ve told me to report as I see fit myself, which from now I am happy to do.

thefirstmrsdewinter · 18/01/2019 21:10

(Early just to fully clarify, in case it sounds sarcastic, what I said is totally 100% in earnest.)

FlyingOink · 18/01/2019 21:08

there was no need for your rude comment
It was me you reported, well done, you got me a deletion. Thank you for your contribution.

thefirstmrsdewinter · 18/01/2019 21:07

Early my sincere apologies, did I get you confused with a pp who loves anal? And I didn't mean to be rude, just a bit cheeky. I truly believe that if you love it you should go get it. I wish there was more enthusiastic female sexual go-getting, I fully endorse it.

FlyingOink · 18/01/2019 21:06

EJennings
That "stapling one's genitals to Formica worktops" court case as referenced earlier.

Similar cases are the kind of thing that could be dragged out for years and in the meantime there's no legal provision to stop the harm. So nothing ever happens.
A bit like Heathrow's third runway, that could stay in the courts for ten years easily, with a good chance nothing will ever be built.
You or I might think sadists' arguments were spurious and their delays were vexatious but that wouldn't stop them clogging it up.

As we know from the AGP lobby and PIE, men's sexual interests are represented at the very highest levels.

EJennings · 18/01/2019 21:06

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Funkyfunkybeat12 · 18/01/2019 21:05

Yup, feministfairy. It’s becoming the norm. There was that horrific case on another thread where a girl ended up with a colostomy bag due to injuries sustained during anal sex. Girls are being taught from an early age that if they want to keep their boyfriends happy, they need to engage in anal, fisting and agree to be choked during sex. What sort of impact does that have on your confidence and sense of self? Asking people who are caught up in abusive dynamics whether they are making a free choice is unhelpful. Nobody wants to think of themselves as a victim or a pushover so of course the young woman in the BDSM relationship or the pornstar or the sex-worker is going say that she chose this life and that she is empowered. It’s often only later once they are free from that dynamic that they can see it for what it was. It’s like the teenagers who have relationships with men in their 30s and it’s only when they are that age themselves that they see how totally wrong and abusive it was.

thefirstmrsdewinter · 18/01/2019 21:02

'Fuck up, lose your house. Now how kinky do you feel?' Is it wrong that I heard that in a Hollywood drill instructor voice? :) :)

'Make them take out Dom Insurance!' Ooh yeah, read those clauses sloooowwwlly.

Earlywalker · 18/01/2019 21:02

thefirstmrsdewinter I didn’t once mention me or what I liked in the bedroom, it was an example so there was no need for your rude comment.

Swipe left for the next trending thread