WIBU to consider writing to every man in the world

[TheRealAmandaClarke]

To inform them all (probably leave Dh out of the round robin) that I do not want to have sex with them unless and until further formal notice from me?

As it seems that there is such confusion among so many people about the nature of consent I want to avoid putting any of them in the terribly awkward position of wondering whether simply being in the same room as them means they are invited to stick their dick in me.
So is that an unreasonable proposition?

I think he might be upset to receive such a letter explicitly removing sexual consent from someone who he has a sexual relationship with.
If he doesn't understand that there is not consent at all times of day and night, that he can't just hop on, and that consent is granted for the individual act (i.e having sex with a person who wilfully consents does not mean you can hop back on five minutes later) then you have bigger issues to deal with.

It was absolutely not a joke about rape.
I know it's useful to some of you to suggest it was. But it was no more a joke about rape than it was a comment on the fiscal processes of 16th century western europe.

These threads are tiresome.

Step 1: Woman makes sweeping rape generalisation about men in general.

Step 2: More women join in and agree and some say 'not my Nigel'.

Step 3: Some men get offended.

Step 4: More women join in and start throwing the NAMALT idiom about.

Can men and women not have a proper conversation on this please like adults and especially as parents so we can give proper advice to our children both sons and daughters?

Amanda, some people appear to be deliberately missing the point. I got it. I thought it was a tad unnecessary until I thought about it some more, and now I'm considering a t-shirt with a simple 'I don't want sex' on it, which I can take off when I want sex with DP. He could have a matching one.

You're flogging a sick pony notauniquename
I have already explained that consent does not need to be in writing and that we have (as do many couples) a dynamic communication.
Its almost as if you are being obtuse.

I do like the idea of his n hers t shirts jessica

I assumed OP left out her DH because she is in a permanent state of non-consent to sex with any other man (and with any woman).

Her wider point being that we should all be assumed to be in an ongoing state of non-consent unless and until we agree otherwise.

And that people (not on this thread) who say "why did she go back with him" or whatever are missing that basic point ie the absence of no is not a yes, as one poster put it.

On the whole, Jessica's tshirt idea is simpler!

Thank you for your post fightorflight
Sorry.

notauniquename

Weeeell, on my part, I see no strangeness about only telling the people you're sure you don't want, ever, to assume lack of consent until "further formal notice".

It's less "not my Nigel" to leave out the people you foresee wanting to shag and more "not making extra work for yourself". I also reuse mugs.

I rather thought "Not my Nigel" was the rude insistence to other women that they should never distrust your Nigel, or say anything that could be taken to imply your Nigel has the capacity to ever do anything wrong, even if they've never met him. I don't think anyone was telling anyone else that they couln't choose to trust particular people for themselves.

I'd like to send a letter out to all women in the world asking them not to shit in the supermarket.

Bad day at work, Tiggy?

Eeeeeeeeeurgh. [vom]

Go ahead. As discussed earlier in the thread, use email. It's cheaper.

Feel free, TiggyD. I wouldn't be offended by it because I don't shit in supermarkets.

Not experienced by me, but some women do it don't they.

I have certainly read disgusting tales of discoveries in aisles and changing rooms.

While we're at it, an email to Everyone about dog shit in letterboxes would be cool. One of the shittest parts of working for Royal Mail, that was.

Fight they still kind of strike me as wankers. When I see school girls on the bus or wherever they very rarely strike me as looking like full grown women. Once again, men could always check. I've hijacked enough but thanks for sharing your perspective.

By letterbox, I mean postbox. The red things with the slots on that are NOT for dog shit.

I will not be offended to receive one myself as part of a coordinated campaign.

Goodness. Is it common for women to shit in supermarkets?
How awful.

Is there a problem with ppl thinking it is ok to shit in a supermarket unless there is a sign up saying "do not shit in this supermarket"?

Feel free to send me your aforementioned letter then.

You haven't highjacked alice.

I have already explained that consent does not need to be in writing and that we have (as do many couples) a dynamic communication.
Its almost as if you are being obtuse.

Perhaps I am being obtuse. (and to an extent deliberately so)

Because what I read on this thread was you saying that consent for sex can never just be implied. except if it's your husband.

Which brings back ideas of, "she was asking for it, just look at how she was dressed." or the bad old question of "how can a man rape his wife" (as if she's somehow his property.)

Is that really the message that you wish to spread? that if you're married or in a relationship consent can be implied, that if you're married or in a relationship not saying no is the same as saying yes?

It's not that I don't think that partners can have subtlety between them, and non-verbal communication, (I said right at the start when I brought that up it's possible) it's that overall I think that your message, and qualification of that message is tuned to your thinking, (which appears to be the particular case of stranger danger rapist hiding in a bush)

As I said, I think the only message that should be taught about consent is that "only yes means yes." (and I think that makes a better campaign tee shirt.)

Yuck tilly

Yawn

It was. It really, really was.

Unique, I would assume (though I might be wrong) that Amanda's point was that her DH ( and only her FH) does not require formal consent. In that I assume (again I might be wrong) that formal consent to something normally means in writing and that Amanda's husband does not need consent it writing before sex, but that other men should wait for consent in writing. Why is she not allowed to make that distinction? In fact, why is any woman not allowed to insist on consent in writing before sex?

Had a child shit in a hat in the outside playhouse, but she was 3 and couldn't have read a letter. Could try drawing a picture of some shit in a hat next to a sad face?

Yes jessica but that doesn't help if someone wants to deliberately misunderstand the point in order to argue for arguments sake.