Consent for women

If the only thing I know about someone is their sexuality, the chances are that I am going to think them boring and not really care what they think of me.

And on the whole, I have never much cared to associate with people who are wondering all the time whether they are going to be able to have sex with me, and if not, why not. That sort of preoccupation is boring too.

When did the word "no" stop

Actually I know when that probably happened. There was a loathsome little phrase going around in the sixties, "If a lady says 'no' she means 'maybe'; if she says 'maybe' she means 'yes'; if she says 'yes' she ain't no lady." The first bit is where the error lies.

I would never find it appropriate for a potential sex partner on a date (or run-up thereto) to "discuss" with me why my sexual preferences didn't include them. I think even a supposedly "theoretical" discussion would feel creepy and uncomfortable and very bad manners; it would force me into the position of either shutting down the conversation abruptly, or having to say something they might take as a hurtful personal rejection, and we all know what sometimes happens when some men feel personally rejected by a woman. It's an issue of both courtesy and safety on my part to avoid having to go into those details.

Obviously I can't speak to the experience of women dating women but I think it's ludicrous to ignore the possibility that these "theoretical" discussions could result in angry, rejected men taking out their frustrations on women for those of us who date men.

Perhaps there is a time a place for abstract and impersonal discussion on this topic but a thread on consent is, it seems, inappropriate to many other posters.

Consent needs no qualifications and that is the problem with you trying to turn this thread to asking why some might exclude any particular groups of people. It doesn’t matter. No one ever needs to explain no. To ask for an explanation is a push against a boundary.

Perhaps you would get a different response, Ted, if you started your own thread on the origins and politics of sexual rejection of bisexuals by homosexuals and heterosexuals, if that is the discussion that you really want.

Genuine apologies to anyone who feels this was an inappropriate place to have this conversation, as I said, I have a vibrant and mentally stimulating all-female group chat where we often discuss things like this and all enjoy sharing our views, so I assumed this was a similar kind of space, especially as I wasn’t disagreeing, I was adding to the opening statement (or so I thought).

Love bloody Island, not Live Island.

"I don't want to," should be sufficient. No one is owed an explanation as to why you don't want to have sex with them. It is infuriating that women are being asked to justify themselves.

I'd find it uncomfortable and inappropriate in the extreme for anyone I was on a date with, or who was asking me for a date, to question why I wasn't willing to sleep with him/her. I would find it weird, tone-deaf, hectoring and also extremely unsexy to receive some kind of "But why? Are you sure about that? Don't you think you're missing out by not sleeping with short men??" interrogation. I can't ever see it being appropriate on a personal level.

Discussing it as a social trend, in theory, rather than on a personal level--of course it is possible to have those conversations. Discussion of how dark-skinned women are often sidelined (wasn't there an example of this on Live Island one time?) Is an example.

But trying to force that discussion to happen when people are talking about something different simply doesn't interest me.

If you’re asking that while holding a cup of tea or trying to pour it into their mouth that is a completely different situation and would be unacceptable and abusive. If the person has drunk half the tea and decides they no longer want it, it would be inappropriate and coercive to question that at that moment.

What I don’t agree with is that there is NEVER a situation where it can be debated, I think in the right contexts it can.

I've never actually met anyone who has said the things you claim are said about bi- women. Maybe I just meet nicer people?

I disagree that there’s no difference. I think it’s fine to be curious about someone’s preference if you’re on a date with them, as it’s key to know these things about each other if any kind of relationship is to progress (or not).

There’s nothing I can do if you’re determined to find something offensive about anything I’ve said, that’s your prerogative, but the fact is I haven’t cast aspersions on anyone’s character. What is so threatening to you about someone who enjoys thinking critically about the world we live in? I don’t find your stance offensive or threatening, I think it’s a shame you’re so closed off to social theory as personally I find it fascinating (and this is the kind of conversation I frequently have in one of my all-female group chats, we all enjoy it and get stuck in) but again, your prerogative, I’m not going to try and force you to go and read about sexual politics if you’re not interested because we actually do agree on the central tenet that bodily autonomy is absolute, consent must be enthusiastically given and can be revoked at any time. I’ve never disagreed with that - but it is also true that our preferences aren’t formed in a vacuum.

Also, nice dismissal of common prejudices bi women face by people on this thread, apparently they’re valid assumptions to hold about us according to some, which is pretty at odds with a pro woman, feminist stance.

I think of the tea analogy

Person A “So you don’t want tea?”

Person B “No.”

Person A “ Well, have you considered why not? Is it actually that you are unreasonably prejudiced against plants which grow in China and India? Maybe it is because you were brought up in a water drinking household where you got the impression that tea is in some way immoral? You ought to give some serious consideration to where your rejection of tea comes from, it might be a sign that you are abusing your privilege in some way or that you have some issues you need to work through. ”

Yes.

This thread is about consent on a practical level not on the academic study of how our sexuality develops.

Yes. And it also seems that the academic discussion about 'prejudice' will shape people's preferences in ways that they may not be comfortable with. It is about 'educating' people and challenging their comfort to allow some groups a wider access to sexual partners, is the way I read it. Framing it as 'prejudice' immediately shows negative connotation. A great deal of care needs to be taken around any of these discussions not to lower people's boundaries through anything that could be considered coercion either on the individual or a sex class or at a total society level.

It is highly relevant to consent for the individual.

Again, more telling about you than it is me, when in every post I’ve been polite, repeated that I agree with the OP and not resorted to personal attacks like ‘I don’t like your attitude’

You might want to read back your posts. You say "I've been polite" - your posts have been hectoring and tone deaf.

Or an attempt top persuade you to change your mind, which is not OK.

But there are hundreds of potential iterations of that scenario. Ultimately nobody is owed an explanation, but context is relevant.

Random bloke in pub: ‘why won’t you have sex with me?’ Unacceptable and coercive.

You, to person you’re on a date with: ‘I don’t want to sleep with anyone under 6ft’
Date person: ‘oh really, why’s that?’ Innocent conversation.

I'd also say that introducing hurdles into the mind of someone's inclination to say "no" is also a concern.