Does gender matter when it comes to sexual consent?

[MyHumpsMyLovelyBabyBumps]

www.salon.com/2013/07/06/does_gender_matter_when_it_comes_to_sexual_consent/

I don't know if this specific case has been linked but I realize this has been kind of done before. One of the comments says this

You're unwilling to accept your personal responsibility to inform your partner of any dealbreakers that would invalidate your consent, but you still want to have sex regardless, so it's on their shoulders. Get bent. If you don't want to have sex with any trans people, TELL YOUR PARTNERS. If they're trans, telling them that will ensure that they don't want to have sex with you either, and you get EXACTLY what you want.

I feel like the message of "yes means yes" is just not getting through. I'm supposed to make a list of things I don't consent to and first take action to tell my partner I don't consent and if not that's my personal responsibility. Take gender confusion out of the picture if I came online and told you my dh and I were having sex and then he pulled out and then stuck a random household object in me with out asking me first, we'd all be in agreement that it was sexual assault.

Why is this different? I don't know I get really irritated because whenever I see it discussed online you get called transphobic for saying that a woman has a right to know what she is being penetrated by. And I don't think I am transphobic, I'm just pissed off people aren't expected to get informed consent.

The article says: "concealing one?s marital status, wealth, age or HIV diagnosis from a sexual partner does not invalidate consent"

I agree with garlicsmutty that this is wrong. It may have been the finding in a specific case, but there is no rule of law to that effect. What vitiates consent may vary from case to case.

I agree this case isn't a good demonstration of the point the author wanted to make.

Eccles, I was referring to a large quantity of online literature and campaigns by trans activists. The trans people I know don't pursue their supposed 'right' to have sex at the expense of other people's right to withdraw consent at any time. "Cotton ceiling" type arguments are seeking exactly this, afaics.

Sexually active adults are required to respect others' preferences, not demand that others alter their preferences. As it happens, my sexuality needs a partner with a working biological penis. I have tried alternative configurations; they don't do it for me, even though I would have preferred to be gay for several other reasons! Nobody is entitled to tell me I must override my own sexual identity so they can have sex with me, or that they know more about my sexual identity than I do.

Kim, I don't know. I have no strong feelings about it either way. I think it is a million miles away from the situation in this court case. I certainly don't think a post surgery trans woman not disclosing their past before entering into a sexual relationship is committing a crime.

Kim, I can't project into your situation so I don't know. But I can offer what I think is a relevant experience - I have aborted sexual encounters after seeing the man's penis. I wasn't that blunt about my reason. And some men have backed out of sex with me mid-proceedings, I assume for similar reasons but also more tactfully framed. It's a disappointment and all that, but it's part of grown-up life, innit.

GS, I think the point is that for trans women (although not trans men), it would be entirely possible for them to have sex with somebody and for that person to not know they were transgender. So the issue then arises of it they have an obligation to tell the other person.

Interesting :) It's not a thing I've thought about that much ... Surely if a trans woman's body matches the partner's likely expectations and is healthy, they're not obliged to supply additional information? They're still obliged to respect any withdrawals of consent, obv.

As to whether they should disclose as a relationship builds up - that's a relationship question, isn't it? There's a whole pile of potential issues in that but, if the partner's enjoying problem-free (and period-free!) sex with our trans woman, those issues are to do with life expectations rather than sexual consent.

I have just read the entire judgement, and the offence regarding using the dildo was not proceded with.

The sexual encounters were oral and digital. The appellant was charged with assault by penetration. And the original judge aggrevated that with breach of trust. The appeal judge removed the breach of trust part, and that is why the sentence was reduced so much.

I completely agree that if you believe that you having sex with someone who you reasonably expect to have a penis, and they don't, that affects your informed consent.

I don't think a post operative trans woman would be committing a crime either. I am not sure that they have an obligation to disclose.

I think the judgement is then in line with what most people in society think is acceptable. I think that it is a totally different situation to somebody who gone through surgery, gone to all the effort to go through the legal process, see doctors etc.

I'm confused as to why anyone wouldn't tell Kim? If it's seen as transphobic to not want to have sex with someone who is trans, why would you want to sleep with someone transphobic?

I thought I was infertile for several years, if I had left dh (who knew) and got with someone else I would tell them. I'f feel it was the ethical thing to do.

I was thinking about infertility, too, Humps. I didn't bother talking to FWBs about mine, but discussed it in detail when I got engaged to one of them. FWBs wouldn't normally expect babies from that relationship, but a future husband might reasonably expect them.

I find this case sad for the individual's involved but the issue itself is very straightforward. One person's desire to have sex should never supercede another person's right to define their own sexuality. If the reason not to disclose is a concern that the other person would not agree to having sex, there's really no contest. I'm angered by lots of articles I've read about this issue which have weighed up a woman's right to define her sexuality against a trans person's desire to have sex and then concluded that not only is the woman's right to define her sexuality and give or not give consent to a sex act less important, but let's throw in some shaming transphobe or homophobe insults at the same time. No-one has a right to have sex.

Argh apostrophe pedant makes apostrophe typo.

It's been happening to me, too, Flora. I'm blaming the weather. And thank you for putting my own case so much more concisely :)

Kim, I can't help wishing you better luck this summer!

I think in a relationship situation it would be quiet upsetting because the other persons family would all know and you've been left out of the secret.

There's no dilemma here.

Reasonable people would disclose something as major as this.

It's on a par with being married; normal people know that if you're married, it is quite likely that if you disclose that fact, someone else might not make an informed choice to have sex with you.

That's why ethical people disclose and unethical people don't.

I do think sexual orientation is about 'biological sex', rather than gender identity, for most people. If there's one area where genitals do matter, its sex! Not least, for reproductive repercussions (or lack of).

I consider myself bisexual anyway, so having a particular set of sex organs wouldn't be a big issue. Deceit concerning them however, would be.

FloraFox I have to agree with you 100%. If there is any pertinent information that is withheld for fear of sex not proceeding, I think people know in their heart of hearts what they are doing is robbing the other party of the opportunity of making informed consent.

What stuns me is how we heard the statement that philanderers should somehow be immune, and the right to cheat on a spouse is somehow sacrosanct. In fact I have a lot more sympathy for this poor kid who has no doubt wrestled with the issues of gender identity for a long time. Not that anything justifies the deception of course. I'm also not looking at the infidelity issue from a prudish perpective, but if knowing your prospective sexual partner was married would stop you from having that sex you are being robbed of making that informed consent. Also I might add the cheating spouse is robbing their wife/husband of making an informed choice regarding sex that then happens in the marital bed which is happening on the assurance of monogamy. This of course has health implications also where the duped partner makes assessment of risk without being in possession of the full facts.

What FloraFox said so well.

A desire to have sex does not trump another's right to define their sexual boundaries.

Deciding that another person does not need to know that one is biologically male or female, when one presents as the other sex, and is embarking on sexual relations, is to decide that the other person's right to bodily autonomy does not matter. That the right to bodily integrity matters less than a fuck.

It is to decide that the other person's value system, world view, political beliefs and individual sexual identity/orientation need not be considered, respected or given any importance. It is to take a decision out of their hands.

Sounds pretty rapey to me.