Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Enthusiastic Consent - I am .. confused.

645 replies

loopyapp · 30/10/2021 11:29

So .. AIBU that the once previously highly held gold standard for consent between partners had to be enthusiastic and complete. Any hesitant or unsure thoughts = a grey area in which the other party should NOT ever step into??

I ask because (I am very new to all this so please be gentle if I've got this wrong) this sudden uprise in trans activists insisting that predominantly gay women (though men too apparently) should willingly sleep with transwomen and transmen regardless of what genitalia they have or where they are in their transition is confusing.

Are trans people really insisting that people have sex with them despite their lack of enthusiastic consent because its their right??

I must have this wrong.. surely.. we were banging the #metoo campaign drum not that long ago .. all up in arms about how both parties need to be fully able and willing to consent to engage in anything that could be considered sexual contact.. its how I've been raising my 4 boys .. its what I completely believe in .. that absolutely everyone is allowed to turn sex down at any point, even during, simply because they wish to without having to give a carefully drafted PC reason????

[Edited by MNHQ to remove poll]

OP posts:
Miliao · 30/10/2021 12:36

@VickyEadieofThigh
Yes, she definitely could have spoken up, I agree.

BaronessEllarawrosaurus · 30/10/2021 12:37

BloodinGutters but but but twaw, saying they are not women is transphobic and denying their existence. Ok I'm being facetious I do actually agree with you but this is what lesbians are up against. When stonewall themselves say it's prejudice to refuse to have sex with trans women because they were born male then we have a serious problem, it's homophobic for starters which isn't a good look for the foremost charity supposedly supporting homosexuality.

It does not matter if this is one trans person or 10 or 10,000 the serious issue is stonewall not sticking up for the rights of lesbians to be same sex attracted.

BloodinGutters · 30/10/2021 12:37

[quote Miliao]@BloodinGutters
I absolutely agree with you, I’m saying the same thing. At no point did I say we can’t speak about this, we need to. But whilst I know some men rape, I don’t believe all men are rapists. That’s the issue I have. I definitely think this needs to be brought to attention, but I don’t think people should be making lazy stereotypes. I get bloody pissed off when people make assumptions about me due to my sex, hair colour, etc.[/quote]
I don’t think anyone is making lazy stereotypes.

Op referenced the bbc article that refers to some tw. She referenced trans activists in her op. I think it’s well recognised here that trans activists are not all trans people. Posters would need to have been living under a rock to not know that.

BigFatLiar · 30/10/2021 12:38

I don't think it's means one has to be doing cartwheels with excitement but to simply have a "yes" isn't enough.. the website explains it better than me.

Enthusiastic. If someone isn’t excited, or really into it, that’s not consent.

The end of the yeah ok why not, or its Saturday night so lets do it. No more general just making out, if we're not excited at the prospect its not consent. Sometimes it's me that wants to and OH just goes along with it because I want to, I'm sexually abusing him because he stopped watching the TV and did something else to please me?

to simply have a "yes" isn't enough - so a yes can mean no? I'm opposed to coercion but if yes isn't enough what is?

In general I go along with the idea but they need to drop the term enthusiastic. Sometimes you have sex just because. Even at our age we have a nice evening out and end with a cuddle and sex, doesn't have to be enthusiastic, just something your both happy with.

DavidDevantsSpiritWife · 30/10/2021 12:38

DD was bullied relentlessly online and irl for saying she did not want to be in a relationship with someone with a penis. She was 15 and had just come out when the bullying began.

At university she was asked by a friend on her course if she was 'a lesbian for sex or gender'. When she said sex the friend (and the rest of the friendship group) froze her out and told her that they were considering reporting her transphobia to the university, and that to not want to be with someone because of their genitals would 'hurt their feelings'. She was also called a fake lesbian and a vagina fetishist by another (ex) friend.

Apparently women must have sex with whoever wants to have sex with them for fear of hurting their feelings. Who knew.

VickyEadieofThigh · 30/10/2021 12:38

@Ijustreallywantacat

Nancy Kelly said that anyone (lesbians) writing off whole sections of people to date (like men) should examine their societal prejudices. That is no different to calling same sex attraction, that is protected characteristic under the equality act, defined as same sex attraction not same gender, a societal prejudice.

Here's what she said, and importantly she said that nobody should be pressured in to dating. So she agrees with you there.

"Nobody should ever be pressured into dating, or pressured into dating people they aren't attracted to. But if you find that when dating, you are writing off entire groups of people, like people of colour, fat people, disabled people or trans people, then it's worth considering how societal prejudices may have shaped your attractions.

She didn't call anyone a bigot, she didn't ask anyone to have sex with anyone else. She uses language like 'may want to consider' and 'may have' because she's asking people to consider that there are some prejudices with how we perceive people. It's obvious going to difficult to reconcile your views because how you each define 'lesbian' is different. But she is not calling anybody a bigot,or transphobic!

She includes lesbians in that. What other than inferring she means lesbians (and I'm defining lesbians as females who are attracted only to females, not bisexual women or the Stonewall 'gender attracted' definition) should rethink their own "prejudices" against sex with males should we take from that?

Really - it's indefensible from her.

fuckoffImcounting · 30/10/2021 12:39

Dog whistle nonsense. Have you nothing better to do?

Thefartingsofaofdenmarkstreet · 30/10/2021 12:40

I do not agree with those who don’t agree with this having to speak out about it. It’s not their job. This was exactly the repost of many when some terrorists were found to be Muslim. I do not think all Muslims are terrorists and I don’t believe that Muslims that are not terrorists need to ‘speak out’ and show they aren’t. I don’t see how this is any different here.

Interestingly, a lot of sex offenders (for example in Rotherham) got away with what they were doing for a very long time because people were terrified to speak about it for fear of being branded bigots. Women and girls suffered immensely and for far longer than they should have because no one wanted to talk about it.

BloodinGutters · 30/10/2021 12:40

@Ijustreallywantacat

Nancy Kelly said that anyone (lesbians) writing off whole sections of people to date (like men) should examine their societal prejudices. That is no different to calling same sex attraction, that is protected characteristic under the equality act, defined as same sex attraction not same gender, a societal prejudice.

Here's what she said, and importantly she said that nobody should be pressured in to dating. So she agrees with you there.

"Nobody should ever be pressured into dating, or pressured into dating people they aren't attracted to. But if you find that when dating, you are writing off entire groups of people, like people of colour, fat people, disabled people or trans people, then it's worth considering how societal prejudices may have shaped your attractions.

She didn't call anyone a bigot, she didn't ask anyone to have sex with anyone else. She uses language like 'may want to consider' and 'may have' because she's asking people to consider that there are some prejudices with how we perceive people. It's obvious going to difficult to reconcile your views because how you each define 'lesbian' is different. But she is not calling anybody a bigot,or transphobic!

It’s the part that comes after the but that matters.

Homosexuality is not a societal prejudice.

FrippEnos · 30/10/2021 12:41

@DellaPorter

It's just a load of rubbish scaremongering not grounded in reality, another attempt to turn people against trans women.
Its something that muddies the water further.

The training that we have just had on this clearly separates biological sex from gender identity yet the person giving the talk clearly said that if you were assigned male at birth but identified as female and you still wanted a sexual relationship with a female you would be a lesbian (there words not mine).

This is where the problem lies.

BloodinGutters · 30/10/2021 12:41

@BaronessEllarawrosaurus

BloodinGutters but but but twaw, saying they are not women is transphobic and denying their existence. Ok I'm being facetious I do actually agree with you but this is what lesbians are up against. When stonewall themselves say it's prejudice to refuse to have sex with trans women because they were born male then we have a serious problem, it's homophobic for starters which isn't a good look for the foremost charity supposedly supporting homosexuality.

It does not matter if this is one trans person or 10 or 10,000 the serious issue is stonewall not sticking up for the rights of lesbians to be same sex attracted.

Agree completely.
anon12345678901 · 30/10/2021 12:42

@DavidDevantsSpiritWife

DD was bullied relentlessly online and irl for saying she did not want to be in a relationship with someone with a penis. She was 15 and had just come out when the bullying began.

At university she was asked by a friend on her course if she was 'a lesbian for sex or gender'. When she said sex the friend (and the rest of the friendship group) froze her out and told her that they were considering reporting her transphobia to the university, and that to not want to be with someone because of their genitals would 'hurt their feelings'. She was also called a fake lesbian and a vagina fetishist by another (ex) friend.

Apparently women must have sex with whoever wants to have sex with them for fear of hurting their feelings. Who knew.

I'm so sorry that happened to her, your poor daughter. I hope she found some new, much better, friends? I got called transphobic online because I said as a straight woman I wouldn't have sex with a trans man. In the end I had to explain they are missing a vital piece of anatomy for me.🤷🏻‍♀️
skodadoda · 30/10/2021 12:42

DellaPorter
It's just a load of rubbish scaremongering not grounded in reality, another attempt to turn people against trans women.
Stop!

*Just stop!

What you are effectively saying is that the real life experiences of women are of no importance, are lies, are imaginary. Whatever your reasoning you are saying that the voices of women can be ignored.

Why would you say that*

Sussex students who have hounded a professor out of her job say they’re not open to debate and won’t be reasoned out of existence. What more is there to say?

Hugsgalore · 30/10/2021 12:43

@SultansOfMing

Nobody has any right to have sex with anybody.

Everybody has the right to choose who they do and don't have sex with.

Everybody has the right to withdraw consent to sexual activity at any point for any reason.

Unsure why anyone would try and argue different?

Completely agree here. Don't know why anyone thinks they can demand someone have sex with them. Is that not rape?
CityMumma78 · 30/10/2021 12:43

I am 100% pro women, as in genetic biological females, and their sexual choices including their right to say NO to TW and their personal safety.

Stonewall frightens me and if anything they are 100% anti-women!

Thefartingsofaofdenmarkstreet · 30/10/2021 12:43

@Ijustreallywantacat

Nancy Kelly said that anyone (lesbians) writing off whole sections of people to date (like men) should examine their societal prejudices. That is no different to calling same sex attraction, that is protected characteristic under the equality act, defined as same sex attraction not same gender, a societal prejudice.

Here's what she said, and importantly she said that nobody should be pressured in to dating. So she agrees with you there.

"Nobody should ever be pressured into dating, or pressured into dating people they aren't attracted to. But if you find that when dating, you are writing off entire groups of people, like people of colour, fat people, disabled people or trans people, then it's worth considering how societal prejudices may have shaped your attractions.

She didn't call anyone a bigot, she didn't ask anyone to have sex with anyone else. She uses language like 'may want to consider' and 'may have' because she's asking people to consider that there are some prejudices with how we perceive people. It's obvious going to difficult to reconcile your views because how you each define 'lesbian' is different. But she is not calling anybody a bigot,or transphobic!

She was asked for an interview about an article to do with lesbians being coerced into sex with transwomen. She declined the interview but did give the above quote. She is referring to lesbians excluding trans people in that quote. She is referring to lesbians excluding transwomen (ie. Male bodied people) as possibly having 'societal prejudices'.

I mean, what the fuck?!

PizzaCrust · 30/10/2021 12:43

Just a few points regarding consent.

Enthusiastic consent is incredibly important. No one should be having sex with anyone who doesn't show clear signs of being 'up for it'. If someone is tired and can't be arsed, you shouldn't be pushing for sex. If you've had to guilt trip someone into 'giving in', you shouldn't be having sex with them. If they seem withdrawn/quiet, it's an absolute no go.

Enthusastic sex doesn't mean, for example, a woman who has ran off to change into sexy lingerie and has a bottle of lube in her hand while saying "I want to have sex!" Sometimes I think people get confused and think that enthusiastic consent means something along those lines. It doesn't.

If you've been with your partner x years, you should know all the signs of them being up for it, vs not. So in those circumstances, you probably don't need to have consent spelt out in such an obvious way. That assumption, however, is based on the fact that you aren't an abusive cunt and actually care about your partner, though. If it's a ONS then in my opinion it needs to be discussed much more openly for clarity, as you simply don't know this person.

And obviously, if anyone shows any signs of discomfort, upset, etc- you stop immediately.

Anyway, obviously no one should be coerced into having sex with someone they don't want to. And it's perfectly acceptable to not want to have sex with someone who is trans. I find the latest movement of trans people not telling people they're trans to be quite disgusting and deceitful, to be honest. Eg my sexual preference is a straight male. I do not want to have sex with anyone else who doesn't fit into that category. If you hide it from me, then it is rape, in my opinion, as I never consented to anything else. And in regards to the well argued point of trans people not telling others they're trans as they might be at risk of violence, I'm sorry but I hugely disagree with that point. Your right for 'safety' is no more important than my right to know what I'm consenting to.

I feel like a lot of the trans movements nowadays are based on 'getting one over' on others as opposed to genuine fears of safety, to be honest. Yes, it is shit to be rejected by most people due to the fact you're trans. However, tricking people isn't the way to overcome that.

Consent is incredibly important and has to work across the board for everyone. Consent as an ideal falls apart if certain members of society somehow don't need to worry about it as they are exempt. Eg if a transwoman doesn't need to disclose that they are trans before sexual intercourse, then why would anyone with STIs have to disclose this? They didn't choose to have one, afterall. Similarly, why would men bother being honest about using condoms? You can just lie and trick people to get what you want, and the other person's mental state afterwards clearly doesn't matter.

People need to be honest. If that means you get rejected more often, then so be it.

DoesHePlayTheFiddle · 30/10/2021 12:44

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk guidelines.

MaxNormal · 30/10/2021 12:44

twitter.com/EuanRL/status/1453737147681308673?t=TkvCCC_kqcA41oz4J-HpdA&s=19

This is what lesbians are up against.

DavidDevantsSpiritWife · 30/10/2021 12:44

@Regularsizedrudy

Oh look another trans bashing thread thinly veiled as concern for women. Yawn
Indeed. How dare women talk about their concerns.

Fucking hell.

DoesHePlayTheFiddle · 30/10/2021 12:45

consider

NotBadConsidering · 30/10/2021 12:45

@Ijustreallywantacat

Nancy Kelly said that anyone (lesbians) writing off whole sections of people to date (like men) should examine their societal prejudices. That is no different to calling same sex attraction, that is protected characteristic under the equality act, defined as same sex attraction not same gender, a societal prejudice.

Here's what she said, and importantly she said that nobody should be pressured in to dating. So she agrees with you there.

"Nobody should ever be pressured into dating, or pressured into dating people they aren't attracted to. But if you find that when dating, you are writing off entire groups of people, like people of colour, fat people, disabled people or trans people, then it's worth considering how societal prejudices may have shaped your attractions.

She didn't call anyone a bigot, she didn't ask anyone to have sex with anyone else. She uses language like 'may want to consider' and 'may have' because she's asking people to consider that there are some prejudices with how we perceive people. It's obvious going to difficult to reconcile your views because how you each define 'lesbian' is different. But she is not calling anybody a bigot,or transphobic!

She’s saying anyone with a fixed same sex attraction should consider whether it’s down to society’s prejudices. She’s denying homoSEXuality. It’s homophobic. And she’s encouraging lesbians to consider a different approach, to consider NOT writing off “an entire group” - males, in this instance. Which is conversion therapy. This, from the Chief Executive of Stonewall FFS.

But everyone who hates that article has wilfully ignored this, and the first accounts of the women, and the actual words of trans activists like Veronica Ivy, someone used by CNN as a “voice” of trans people, and instead focussed on the sample representation. It’s disgusting.

MobyDicksTinyCanoe · 30/10/2021 12:45

My dd has got me into Tiktok of all things and there are a LOT of transwomen on there stating when they have their op they won't be telling people their trans.

The worrying thing is in the comments section it's women (( girls)) who are agreeing with this stating it's fine. It's actually men saying that isnt ok.

Has the world turned on its axis? Imagine a lesbian rape victim finding out she'd essentially been tricked into sex with a biological man? Is this even legal?

Thefartingsofaofdenmarkstreet · 30/10/2021 12:45

@MaxNormal

Jesus Christ......Sad
Miliao · 30/10/2021 12:46

@BloodinGutters
I think we pretty much on the same page, people should only have sex with people they want to and find attractive. Nobody should force anyone into having sex with them. If people only find a certain race, sex, age group (legally!), hair colour etc., attractive then they should be free to do just that and not forced into having sex with someone they don’t fancy. All I am saying is that the view of a small minority should not be thought as the view of that whole group. As in your example, some men rape, we need to talk about rape, but we should not assume all men think they should be able to rape.