Consent for women

Thanks Arabella.

Food for thought. So yes is yes is basically enthusiastic consent? A problem when one person or both are drunk and/or high on drugs because they may say yes but are they actually able to give consent?

I do like that consent is being discussed openly and explicitly in schools. We can at least let kids know that if one of them wants to take what they’re doing to another level, it’s a good idea to pause and ask their partner if that’s OK, and they should be prepared for their partner to say “Yes” or “No” or “Not today” or even “I’m not sure. Let’s talk about it first.”

I thought this pretty much sums it up:

"What we want to create is a standard of behavior, a paradigm shift as much as a legal shift.” But what does this “paradigm shift” mean for kids who are expected to abide by a standard that even educators and advocates can’t adequately explain? Probably it means we’re moving from the gray area of “no means no” to the gray area of “yes means yes.”

If someone doesn't want to have sex with a person from a different racial/ethnic background then chances are there's a racist reason behind it. I don't think that person is going to stop having a racial prejudice because they've had a good hard think about it.

"Let your 'yes' be yes and your 'no' be no."

Our words mean something.

Historically the words of a woman have been seen to have less value than those of a man. A woman's witness didn't count for as much as a man's testimony. Which is partly why women are still struggling to be heard.

I am not attracted to what I think of as 'frog like' men. More than that, it is a visceral reaction, I am physically repelled by them. Bulbous eyes, rubbery lips, squat. Ugh. It's not reasonable or rational and I am sure some are perfectly delightful but it's how my body reacts.

Can I imagine a scenario where I might be chatting about preferences in the context of talking with a group of mates about what could possibly have caused my frog-faced aversion - no idea! - and remininisce over the nightmare time I was acting in a play as 'the loving wife' of the froggiest guy ever? Mayyyybe.

But, I have never admitted it before now. Nor needed to. Why does it matter to anyone else? And it might even be a bit insensitive if one of my mates or their partner looked a bit, well, froggy.

So I definitely wouldn't want to explain to a potential froggy looking date that that's why I'm not attracted to them.

My 'no' is enough. To my body and to my spaces.

It is not an opening bargaining position that I can be argued/persuaded /cajoled out of.

"What about this guy? He's less froggy looking than some. You should be worried about the toad-like ones, the frogs are fine. My friend is lovely and though he's froggy looking he wouldn't hurt a fly. Are you against all reptilian looking people too?
You're being froggist."

If I cannot manage an enthusiastic yes, then it's a definite no from me.

Is anyone else reading the words of a socialist journalist and having a vision of the Eiffel tower?

This tangent of the right and interest in discussing preferences takes me back to when I was a teenager. I currently have no interest in how anyone’s preferences are formed but I will defend their rights to their preferences. I find questioning someone’s preferences on a date rapey and outside a date just.. weird.

When I was young it was more question of my friends teasing me for liking clever, often not very good looking guys and me being baffled by their preferences for handsome idiots. It was never any detailed discussion about it or any justification. Then we all grew up.

The only thing I can see myself question would be if someone stated that they only wanted to date tall, dark, blue eyed men who went to the gym a lot, had a high income, played at least two instruments, liked both cats and dogs, sensitive, loved children and had both a summer house and a boat. I might suggest to broaden their dating pool slightly...maybe.

Sexual preferences are very personal and should not need justification. A no is always a no.

"No, I don’t believe you have an inalienable right not to be asked a question. I do think everyone has an inalienable right to decide who they’ll have sex with. But discussing it is not the same as pressuring someone to change their mind"

I also really dislike this disingenuous "oh we are just examining your prejudices, I'm only asking you to explain" when it comes to sexual preferences and consent. Let's be honest. If a man questions you on sexual preferences and why you're don't want to have sex with an individual, or a certain category of men, it's normally not having some sort of theoretical discussion and examining why certain beliefs are held - it's saying but why don't you want my cock inside you, is it because you're bigoted? Explain yourself.

Staying people have the right to question others on their sexual preferences and behaviour for their own interest is deeply unpleasant.

"I have an idea of why my view is in the minority and I think it’s because as much as a certain cohort on here crows about young women and wanting to protect them, they actually largely view them with utter contempt and are very resistant to the evolution of societal norms and don’t actually want to engage in any kind of meaningful feminist activism or conversation."

Well that's rude as fuck, as well as totally wrong.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/4106577-To-ask-whats-the-weirdest-reason-you-have-decided-to-not-go-on-a-second-date-with-someone

Yet not wanting to have sex with whole subset of people is somehow treated differently.

On the same theme - fertility also impacts on contraception. Which is another big aspect of consent around sexual behaviours for many people.
It is dishonest to conceal this if your partner is clear about wanting children.

MrsWooster
Interesting graphic. I thought the point about fertility was a pertinent one to raise - actually people do talk about this, often very early on in a relationship. If you are of an age and place in your life where children are part of your aspirations, you should talk about this openly and honestly. My DH mentioned on our first date he was keen to have more kids. I ruled out dating anyone who'd had a vasectomy in my 30's and infertility is the cause of many people breaking up. So, whilst it might feel unfair, it is a significant issue and to pretend otherwise is disingenuous.

It strikes me that there is a wider sociological discussion to be had here.

But it isn't "Why don't some people want to have sex with certain other people? What does it all MEAN??" That's a valid question. But it's not the one most posters want to engage with.

The question is: how do we move society to a point where wholeheartedly and immediately accepting a woman's "no, I will not have sex with that individual/group" is the norm?

Because the actual context in which we live is that many, many people, particularly women, are still met with counterarguments, whining, resistance, accusations of being frigid/bigots/bitches, etc. when they attempt to say no. The notion that sex is owed to a partner because XYZ is still very widespread.

How strange for some people think that something as ineffable and personal as attraction can be overriden by someone telling you: "you're doing it wrong".

I don’t think having a preference on the kind of genitals you’ll interact with is the same as filtering out partners based on race, weight, sexuality etc, which might have an element of prejudice

@TedMullins It's not always about genitals. A lesbian shouldn't have to want sex with a transgender person even if the trans person has had gender reassignment surgery.

Arabella

An interesting discussion was the shift from 'no means no' to 'yes means yes'.

That is interesting. I don't know much about this. How did that come about? Can you point me in the right direction?

I have an idea of why my view is in the minority and I think it’s because as much as a certain cohort on here crows about young women and wanting to protect them, they actually largely view them with utter contempt and are very resistant to the evolution of societal norms and don’t actually want to engage in any kind of meaningful feminist activism or conversation.

Oh no, we're not doing feminism nor feminist activism right. Who would have thought.

Why can't they accept "No"?

Any follow up question after "no" is chipping away at the absolute concept of "no" and chipping away at the right to have boundaries.

Absolutely this.

@MNHQ I am astounded that you deleted me for standing up for lesbians' right to say no to bi women.

Ted, I'm sure you're aware that there's a significant difference in context between your private group of like-minded friends on WhatsApp and a website that can be viewed by anyone and which is known to be watched by individuals who read in order to screenshot examples of "bigotry," lift entire sections of conversations to publish in clickbait articles, or to post goady, insincere crap for the fun of winding up those awful mumsnetters.

I actually do think that issues of mate selection at a sociological level are really interesting, that's why I brought up the example of Black women as discussed in the media during a recent series of Love Island.

But I don't feel like discussing it further here, not because I can't handle an intellectual discussion, or because I look down on young people, or because I'm not interested in the topic. I just have no desire to have any of my thoughts on the subject screenshotted and taken out of context by lurkers. It's a discussion I'd keep to my own circle of WhatsApp friends as we also enjoy discussing sociological shit from time to time.

In short: people aren't necessarily rejecting your discussion topic because they aren't as clever as you and your friends. They're just aware that this isn't a private conversation between friends.

You might get an interesting discussion running on this on the Relationships board though, as you'll have a large number of regulars there who are actively dating.

Excellent OP Arabella, I wish this was taught at schools and colleges and printed on bus shelters and billboards.