The invisible men project

[ArmyOfPenguins]

I think it's important that the buyers' choices in prostitution are highlighted and shared. This project was linked to on FB. Thoughts? I think it's a great idea.

the-invisible-men.tumblr.com/

Oh, and you had sex with a woman as some sort of barter for something mysterious and you feel you are the weak and wounded party??

SG were you the provider of sex in exchange for "something else" ?

Merriam-Webster

www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/consent

Definition of CONSENT
1 : to give assent or approval : agree
2 archaic : to be in concord in opinion or sentiment

www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/rape

rapedrap·ing
Definition of RAPE
1 a archaic : to seize and take away by force
b : despoil

         Definition of DESPOIL : to strip of belongings, possessions, or value : pillage 

Oxford Dictionaries

oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/consent

noun [mass noun]
permission for something to happen or agreement to do something:no change may be made without the consent of all the partners

verb [no object]
give permission for something to happen:he consented to a search by a detective

oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/rape

noun [mass noun]

1the crime, typically committed by a man, of forcing another person to have sexual intercourse with the offender against their will:he denied two charges of rape [count noun]:he had committed at least two rapes [as modifier]:a rape victim
archaic the abduction of a woman, especially for the purpose of having sexual intercourse with her:the Rape of the Sabine Women

2the wanton destruction or spoiling of a place:the rape of the countryside

verb [with object]

1(typically of a man) force (another person) to have sexual intercourse with the offender against their will: the woman was raped at knifepoint [no object]:he pleaded not guilty to burglary with intent to rape

___

Permission given is exactly that, it is "consent". Rape is by definition "forcing another person to have sexual intercourse with the offender against their will" eg: without consent.

To claim that consent freely given, but not given for reasons other than those which you as an observer deemed to be qualifying reasons, does not make acceptance of that consent an act of rape. Anyone who thinks so is by definition, wrong. There may be other ways to define the issue or scenario which you seek to describe but it most certainly is not rape.

Thanks for that, sg. Very informative.

However, what you are failing to understand, quite wilfully failing, is that Beach is referring to a feminist analysis of consent by women for sex. As a sexually active woman, this is of great interest to me, personally. It is not warm and fluffy, it is challenging, and for that reason a lot of people may find it uncomfortable to consider.

Your c&p of a load of dictionary definitions, including, laughably "he consented to a search by a detective" doesn't change this.

johns generally get quite upset and full of male perspective entitled bluster when a woman analyses consent from a female non male centric position. they dont like it because it cuts through the bullshit and firmly links consent and rape in a way that makes them jolly annoyed. plenty of johns are happy to rape - they just dont like it being called that.

runningforthebusinheels: I'm an active member on mumsnet but I'm not a mum, that's the kind of assumption I was referring to and the sort which people make all too often. What deragatory remarks about women?

My assumptions about your return to the dark ages was in respect of your assumtion that I'm a punter. Unless you are claiming these questions were not rhetorical?

"Written any good reviews on p u n t e r n e t lately? Are you on the invisible man project?"

"also dismissed, out of hand, a very interesting feminist analysis on the nature of consent."

It's not interesting when it's completely wrong. I agree there is a discussion to be had and some points made do have merit but the whole "interesting feminist analysis" falls completely flat when you start twisting the meaning of words in plain English to win an argument. To suggest that consent can only be given when the woman "wants sex" and under any other circumstance the man is guilty of rape is staggeringly ludicrous.

"Oh, and you had sex with a woman as some sort of barter for something mysterious and you feel you are the weak and wounded party??"

Do you ever actually read anything properly?

I wrote that "I felt weak and sorry for myself. I'm still not sure why." which was my response to what happened from my own perspective, I did not offer fine details about the other person nor did I compare who was the weaker or more wounded party as a final score on the matter.

I have been open and honest and now your are simply being awkweard and argumentative. A shame I assumed incorrectly once more.

You don't like women asking you to state your position clearly do you, SG

Everyone else has been clear about where they stand, and you have offered nothing but vague, hand-wavey comments, pasted dictionary definitions and fudged the reasons why you are defending men who buy sex

are you going to stop replying to running now she has overstepped how far you perceive she is allowed to challenge you ?

An active MNetter? Are you a namechanger? Are you Larry??

To suggest that consent can only be given when the woman "wants sex" and under any other circumstance the man is guilty of rape is staggeringly ludicrous.

No it's not ludicrous at all. As Beach says, you are considering consent from a male-centric, patriarchal viewpoint. The feminist analysis considers it from a female viewpoint and has been a true lightbulb moment for me, and many others on this thread. Go ahead, c&p the whole dictionary to me if you want Beach is talking about a political analysis, not a dictionary definition.

FYI, your posts at 10.21, 10.34 and 12.15 contain some breathtakingly misogynistic remarks - which are unfortunately far from rare on these boards.

Beachcomber: "johns" You really are quite nasty aren't you.

Any reasonable man including but not limited to the genuine considerate gentleman type would be concerned by your ridiculous (and wrong), claims. Indeed, any man not concerned by this would be the type who doesn't care, the precise type of man who would have no concerns for the feelings of women which if I understand correctly is what women here are unhappy with. I do care, perhaps that is what really troubles you.

"johns" is what you take offence at? This is how prostitutes refer to punters (one of the ways, anyway!)

You know what? I think many, many men and women would be uncomfortable about the feminist analysis of consent. Rightly so - men need to stop thinking of sex as something that is "given" by women - or worse, something to be "got from" women. It should be something that she is equally participating in. And not because money is changing hands.

running SG has sent you to Coventry now

Oh, that's a shame

And Beach is "nasty" for using a nasty word. Oh dear. What nasty people we all are.

Perhaps a more enlightening definition for sg to ponder

Example: Post at 10.21, what misogynistic remarks?

When a subject of discussion comes down to an accusation of "rape" there is no "political analysis", there is no "feminist analysis" and there is no "male-centric, patriarchal viewpoint" towards the issue of consent under such circumstances.

In case you haven't heard, "no means no" and "rape is rape". You cannot twist the definition of rape to suit your own agenda.

Beachy is not "nasty" for using a nasty word, Beachy is nasty for implying that I'm a "john".

"You know what? I think many, many men and women would be uncomfortable about the feminist analysis of consent. Rightly so - men need to stop thinking of sex as something that is "given" by women - or worse, something to be "got from" women. It should be something that she is equally participating in."

And you really think that is what "men think of sex" generally, that it is some sort of right or privilege to be claimed on demand, that women are all abused because of this? If you do that's a sad world you live in.

Really sg? No means no and rape is rape? That simple is it?

This is very uncomfortable from a male point of view, because it challenges any man who has ever pressurised a woman into sex, anyone who has ever pushed and nagged a woman until she says 'oh go on then' and had sex just to stop the arguing. Legally he can say 'but she said yes, your honour.' But morally? Ethically, he has just pushed a woman into sex she doesn't want.

BTW Ched Evans was convicted of rape even though he claimed he asked permission and she said yes.

And you really think that is what "men think of sex" generally, that it is some sort of right or privilege to be claimed on demand,

That is exactly what a punter is doing when he pays a prostitute for sex.

runningforthebusinheels: I agree, pushing a woman into sex is morally and ethically wrong, why are you telling me this? I said no means no and I meant it.

The second point you have twisted yet again.

"And you really think that is what "men think of sex" generally"

That is exactly what a punter is doing when he pays a prostitute for sex.

what 'men think generally' is not quite the same thing as 'paying a prostitute for sex', is it.

Also I've answered all your questions, looking for the same courtesy if that's ok. Example: Post at 10.21, what misogynistic remarks?

really all this brings us back to the chapter by MacKinnon on coercian and consent WRT rape. MacKinnon aphoristically describes how the very definition of rape is a male perspective and one that is steeped in patriarchal non accordance of value to women's lived experience - and yet rape is primarily something that is done to women. rape is a female lived experience and we are denied the right to define it.

and the phrase "no means no" is just another male perspective.

it is the concept of consent as a catchy slogan. it is also a rape myth and victim blaming (many women are raped and they didnt get to say no. this is rape culture in action.)

sorry for rather cryptic posts. am on phone.

I think that some men do think of sex this way yes. Not all men, but some do.

My point was that all punters think of sex this way - something they can just pay for, a privilege to be claimed on demand.

Your post at 10.21: Women, often, make themselves "sexually available to men" and men respond.

is inherently misogynistic because it implies that women are temptresses who switch sexual their sexual availability on and off so that 'men respond' - ie the oldest trope in the book that women use their feminine wiles to get what they want from men.

Rather than talking about women being sexually available to men or not (which subscribes to the patriarchal idea that women are the gatekeepers of sex) all women should be considered on an equal par to men, and an equal participant in sex. Prostitution means that society allows some women (the 'whores' as opposed to the 'madonnas') to be sexually available to men on demand and on the payment of cash. This is not an equal arrangement.

and the phrase "no means no" is just another male perspective.

it is the concept of consent as a catchy slogan. it is also a rape myth and victim blaming (many women are raped and they didnt get to say no. this is rape culture in action.)

YES.

'No means no' is almost like a get out of jail free card. It leads to "She didn't say no, guv, how was I supposed to know she wasn't consenting to sex?" I refuse to believe that any man is so dim he can't tell whether a woman is enthusiastically participating in sex or not.

I actually prefer 'yes means yes.' Anything else is 'no'. Because that at least doesn't assume that women are in a permanent state of sexual consent until they say otherwise.

and sgheuks - knock it off with the personal attacks on me or i will report you.

women have the right to discuss these things without men attacking them.

im of the opinion that men should enter feminist discussions with humility and a willingless to listen - otherwise it looks like an assumption of superiority.

sg: your post at 10.34: So what about the woman who's drunk, consents, then regrets it. What about the woman who is a scheming, machiavellian type who will use her sexual prowess to achieve what she wants in life? Say this woman has regular sex with a man who she otherwise would not touch with a bargepole, in order to get ahead in a career or other area of life? Say also that the man falls for her, what then? "She" doesn't actually want sex with him but she's doing it, ultimately, for financial gain. Now who can "you happily blame" and is it rape ?

Also horribly misogynistic - although you may not realise it? That sort of opinion of women - that they get drunk and regret it, and then what? Cry rape? Statistics borne out by the cps show this is a very rare occurrence. Women using sex to get ahead? I'm sure some have, and I'm sure some will continue to - but I'll bet it's not as common as you think. And I'll bet it's not nearly as common as the number of women who endure workplace sexual harassment from men in positions of power.

In fact, all your posts show a very deep-seated distrust of women and their sexuality.