Uncomfortable feelings about the teaching of "consent"

[Tootickyandsnufkin]

I hope I explain this ok. I'm not entirely sure this makes sense, or if I'm expressing something obvious.

Consent comes up a lot on here/MN. Usually the discussion is around whether consent is confusing etc. Everyone is familiar. I hope isn't is prompting the usual debate. But I guess maybe that where it goes.

The idea of teaching "consent" to boys/young men bothers me. I wonder what it says about men that they have to be taught. Then i think about what else we teach our children. Thinking on the go....I guess we work to develop empathy in many areas but how do they develop naturally otherwise? isn't there some sort of innate compassion that stops people, eg, committing acts of violence? Or is it consequences that shapes behaviour. Which of course there is generally a lack of in terms of non consensual sex/sexual acts.

And if we try to teach our sons about consent, are those who have ignored a lack of consent simply those who weren't adequately educated?
Is it depressing to think there are a huge group of boys/men for whom its an educational issue? Or is that a very negative way to think?

Didn't say that Rebel. If you think that men can be kept entirely in check by women, and man are not required, then that would seem to suggest there is no need for feminism.

So is there an imbalance there or are there at least an equal number of sexual acts that women would prefer that are not comfortable for men ? If not - can such an imbalance ever be entirely socially corrected?

Difficult question to answer girl, because hitherto men have predominantly called the shots, sexually. They are rarely in the subordinate position they would need to be in in order to experience acts they are not comfortable with.

I remember at school I was groped by a girl in front of the whole class. It was a deeply humiliating and perturbing experience, and I've never forgotten about it. However, it was positive experience insofar as it gave me a glimpse of what it must be like for so many women to live in a male dominated world where being the victim of a casual assault is a commonplace.

It all depends on whether you regard sexual violence as inherently phallic. If it is, then the imbalance can never be socially corrected. However, we know that it is not universally so. Women do molest children, and penetratively with the use of objects or fingers. If they are in a position of sexual power, they can abuse that power: it's just that more often than not they're not in that position. Also they're socialised to be sexually submissive.

I'm wondering how the internet will change things, because it disembodies and de-phallicises sexual abuse in lots of ways. You don't to be a big strong man to abuse online - you can not only be anyone, but pretend to be anyone.

This is still the case today, we expect rapists and murderers to be arrested and locked away and controlled, by other men

Do we? I expect rapists and murderers to be arrested by the police and thereafter to be processed by the judicial system.

For practical purposes men will be guarded by male prison officers.

I've explained consent to my older children, male and female. I've also explained how sometimes two men get married, two women get married, how a persons skin colour doesn't mean anything good or bad.

'The fact is that women do depend on men as men depend on women. In early societies women were indeed dependant on local groups of men to protect them from other men. This is still the case today, we expect rapists and murderers to be arrested and locked away and controlled, by other men. It's obvious to say "if men weren't violent none of this would matter" but some men are and always have been wishing they weren't and admonishing them for it is no basis for a society.'

This is exactly what I mean. Men use the threat of other men to control women - ie, 'men are out to get you, but stay with us, give us sex, make our dinner and raise our children and we'll protect you.'

'Didn't say that Rebel. If you think that men can be kept entirely in check by women, and man are not required, then that would seem to suggest there is no need for feminism.'

I genuinely don't understand this comment. Are you saying that men are naturally violent and need to be controlled, but if women can control them then feminism isn't needed

Having been a juror on two sexual assault trials- one child, one adult- I think anything that addresses and refutes rape myths is essential and badly overdue.

Not read the full thread but there was an interesting piece of research where men admitted to rape if it was worded differently, e.g. if the word "made" "forced" etc was used.

I think consent absolutely needs to be taught. It won't stop the violent misogynists but it might make others think twice.

Didn't say that Rebel. If you think that men can be kept entirely in check by women, and man are not required, then that would seem to suggest there is no need for feminism.

I'll admit I don't know much about feminism,but I'm sure it's not about women keeping men in check/controlling them.

Part of the problem is porn, which subliminally conveys the perception that women like being forced - that propagate rape as a normal sexual fantasy. That's what's dangerous, and what has to be countered by education.

Sex should be understood as an exercise mutuality, trust and emotional closeness.

I think consent absolutely needs to be taught. It won't stop the violent misogynists but it might make others think twice.

Good point. There will always be men that rape because they want to rape.
But teaching the rest,especially future generations that:
-having sex with your wife because it's your right and her duty is not ok
-that whinging and whining and sulking in order to get sex is not ok
-that "you just need to let me convince you/get you i. The mood" is not ok
-that if she's too drunk it's not ok
-that coming over means sex is not ok
-that flirting,kissing etc means sex is not ok
-that dressing a certain way or having a certain past means she'll have sex with you is not ok

..and so on,can only be a good thing.

i think many men who commit rape know damn fine they don't have consent, they don't care - they think they can get away with it.

This (early in the discussion) nails it for me: 'I didn't know it was wrong' has been in the papers in the last year as used by men of different cultures as an excuse when arrested (apparently attacking out of sight of others and the woman screaming and clearly distressed and refusing was no indicator to them that they might have noticed it was wrong). It's always been taught by inference. I do agree it needs to be openly talked about and put into clear language and clear messages with all boys and girls, in part too to help the girls develop confidence in resisting any unwanted attention. Certainly that information, confidence and clarity would have helped me as a child and teenager (30 years ago) It needs to be clearly established what consent is and what is and is not ok.

One thing I hadn't thought of before (always such interesting and well thought out discussions on this board) - the excellent point that consent is taught to young children from a very early age in respecting other people's property, turns, right to refuse touch/hugs, a much greater awareness from adults in considering children's dignity in personal care in schools and in respecting and fostering children's right to say no when uncomfortable. All of which is great. But this is also a time culturally where respect for other people's rights, space and feelings can be seen as very old fashioned with a belief in 'it's my right to do such and such', and many children are not encouraged to not touch other people's belongings, to respect their space etc.

This is the root of consent, respect for other people's boundaries and right to say no, which makes me wonder if we're not going to have more issues with sexual consent in the future. Which would make it even more important to explicitly teach children about it.

I've been sexually assaulted multiple times by men from different countries/cultures, and it's a mixture of me being naive (victim blaming myself somewhat) and me being vulnerable and taken advantage of. I do think education in schools would be beneficial - two of these times were "friends" who I trusted and saw as good people (obviously I don't think so anymore). Both happened almost exactly the same way/same situation, and I do believe that if they had learnt more about consent, or even shown that cup of tea thing, it might not have happened. The other 2 times it has happened was with bastards basically. Yes - 4 times! That's major bad luck I think. This was back in 2008/2009 and once in 2003.

Some men do think rape is a common fantasy thing, both for men and women. I genuinely hope this is not the case. I don't know what the right answer is to be honest, but something needs to happen.

I watched a programme yesterday about a girl who had been abducted at knife point and repeatedly raped over 24 hours. They eventually caught the guy and prosecuted him, and he got a life sentence "with a recommendation that he should not be released before serving 7 and a half years". That was bad enough and the victim felt hugely let down by the justice system. However the fucker appealed against that and they actually reduced his sentence to 5 years. So even in the case of a "real" rape by a stranger where a weapon was used, the sentence was still laughable.

You will often find expressed, in discussions around consent, the idea that there is a 'grey area' - a situation in which men don't or can't know whether a woman consents or not. I find this idea absolutely ludicrous - it illustrates the way in which men in particular and society in general try to somehow justify assault and rape. Women buy into the idea of a grey area as it's easier to imagine that men are that stupid than it is to imagine that someone they liked/cared about/loved deliberately assaulted them.

If men genuinely can't tell whether the person right next to them is happy with what they're doing or not then they're clearly dangerous and should not be allowed to be in contact with women, ever.

And YY rumbling. That "I didn't know I couldn't just take what I wanted" has been used as a defence in sexual assault trials before by men from other cultures.

If men genuinely can't tell whether the person right next to them is happy with what they're doing or not then they're clearly dangerous and should not be allowed to be in contact with women, ever.

Absolutely, and this for me is another reason for explicit consent education to be made compulsory. If everyone has to learn what consent looks like, then these excuses will no longer hold water. We know that they're bullshit, we know what consent is, but right now we can't definitively show beyond reasonable doubt that Joe Rapist did.

However, it's important to note that explicit teaching about consent isn't an end game in itself. Tearing down Patriarchal ideas of what sex is the end game, but in the meantime, it goes some way toward doing the job.

I genuinely don't understand this comment. Are you saying that men are naturally violent and need to be controlled, but if women can control them then feminism isn't needed confused

Hmmm - I suppose I think that in order for any society to function, male violence needs to be controlled. I think that women cannot control male violence. That was all, i didn't think it was a controversial statement.

If men genuinely can't tell whether the person right next to them is happy with what they're doing or not then they're clearly dangerous and should not be allowed to be in contact with women, ever.

I agree with this entirely (but should replace men with "people"). And this is exactly why "teaching consent" is IMO pointless.

The fact is that the whole idea that consent is confusing and needs to be explained is because some men pretend that they are confused and that is the only reason why they committed rapes and sexual assaults in the first place. This pretence has been spectacularly successful, especially in online debates, to the point that people are now suggesting that there are innumerable "grey areas" and we should have consent signed in triplicate and etc.

If we really required that teachers sit boys down and say "Now billy, which items from this list are not acceptable" ?

^But teaching the rest,especially future generations that:
-having sex with your wife because it's your right and her duty is not ok
-that whinging and whining and sulking in order to get sex is not ok
-that "you just need to let me convince you/get you i. The mood" is not ok
-that if she's too drunk it's not ok
-that coming over means sex is not ok
-that flirting,kissing etc means sex is not ok
-that dressing a certain way or having a certain past means she'll have sex with you is not ok^

Anyone who thinks forcing someone to have sex in any of the above scenarios is basically a dangerous psychopath - they could memorise the list and reel off the answers in a quiz, thus passing the consent workshop, the exercise is entirely pointless.

Also some men,especially in deeply misogynistic cultures, feel safe in the knowledge that the girl/woman will be blamed and shamed and no one would face that. For example my maths tutor. He sexually harassed girls for years. The parents knew,there was talk,there were warnings. He never had a complaint made against him,and people still sent their daughters to him because he'd get great results. He'd also touch them up,n his own house,in a room with other people knowing not a peep would be made. Dunno if it ever went any further than that as i stopped going after the second time.

Apologies, I was away and I know the thread has moved on but I wanted to come back to what @RitaCrudgington said about the man assaulted me being a bastard and the bystanders wouldn't do anything so grim themselves. That it's only a small group of men who do this stuff.

I'm afraid it's worse than that. The offender wasn't a bastard. He wasn't some dreadful person who can't function in society. He was just an average guy, with friends and a close family and a long term girlfriend. Up until the assault I thought he was ok though we weren't friends.

The male bystanders in his group weren't innocent. The assault was carried out in order to win a bet.

As it happens I was wearing a lower cut top than usual. Nothing out of the ordinary, nothing that would make my mother frown so to speak but certainly different to what I usually wore. I was in a long term relationship and was very serious about my studies so I got on with all the lads on the course but there was no flirting or sexual banter between us.

Apparently my breasts were the subject of some discussion, then one man bet the other £10 to grope me. No one said "don't" they all watched to see what happened.

So he did.

A pp wondered if the man committing the assault didn't know it would upset me or whether he just didn't care.

I think the answer was that he didn't think about me at all. I wasn't a person in that moment, I was just a pair of pretty breasts and an opportunity to simultaneously look like a big man and win £10.

It wasn't about sex. He didn't want to have sex with me. He loved his girlfriend. I'm pretty sure he didn't gain any sexual gratification from the act.

It was about power. He did it because his friend bet him, he wanted the money (although he was a nice middle class boy and didn't need it) and didn't see any reason not to get it. He did it because he could. He did it because I couldn't stop him.

My feelings weren't relevant to his actions at all. I wasn't relevant at all.

I think Too that you started this thread because you don't want to believe that your lovely sons could do anything so dreadful. That not behaving this way should be inherent. I'm not sure it is.

So yes, we have to teach our sons specifically about wrong and right in this situation. And we have to specifically teach our daughters how they should expect to be treated and how to respond if they are not.

'Hmmm - I suppose I think that in order for any society to function, male violence needs to be controlled. I think that women cannot control male violence. That was all, i didn't think it was a controversial statement.'

So are men inherently violent?

I think Too that you started this thread because you don't want to believe that your lovely sons could do anything so dreadful. That not behaving this way should be inherent. I'm not sure it is.

Yes maybe ColemansCat. Obviously it's difficult to put words to those fears. It might even be that I posted because I think any man can be that person or that bystander. And that means my sons. And is it right and wrong that those students needed to be taught? Isn't it teaching them to see you as person.

I posted earlier that I don't want someone to have to learn to respect my autonomy. That's not good enough. Not sure I've found a different way to think. But it does seem like I've fixed that idea in my mind that isn't held by others and was incorrect.

Your thoughts are shaped by your experiences Ticky, and I completely understand and agree with where you're coming from.

So are men inherently violent?

They (and I assume we are in 'NAMALT' territory here) seem to have an inherent desire to control things (territory, people, resources), and they use violence to achieve that control. Don't you think ?

Anyway - i don't want to stray off the topic at hand again - my post a couple back sums it up for me. The idea consent is something we need to teach only exists because men who want to get away with rape and sexual assault, pretend not to understand it or claim they were confused.

The fact is that OP that as long as your sons are kind and decent, like the vast vast majority of men, then they will understand perfectly well what is and is not right.

but the majority of men who commit sexual assault do so in the full knowledge that they are forcibly depersonalising a women into a discardable receptacle: they just don't care. in fact, for some sex offenders the thrill comes from the very fact that the victim does not consent. They are sadists and enjoy her lack of consent.

This. I realise I'm going back here but this is the core part of the puzzle, imo.

I think that teaching consent will help, in that an educated society will make it easier to prosecute, make rape myths less prevalent and so on. But perhaps women should be targeted equally, as I think women can be more accepting of rape myths than men if they have never been educated about it or thought about it independently.

I suspect that the emphasis on consent comes from trials where men claim the woman consented. Therefore, it is logical to assume that men don't understand consent. Maybe that is true in a minority of cases, but essentially it is not true. Men understand consent. Society has got so tangled up in it though, I think we are fighting the wrong battle. It's like saying "she didn't consent because this is what consent is, and why it matters" in reply to the perpetrator saying "but I thought she consented". But we are responding to a lie.

The rapists I have worked with are angry. They understand consent. They don't steal or fail to understand other forms of respect for others. They usually understand the impact on the victim. And that is why they have done it. Rape is violence, it makes them feel powerful, gives them control, they express their anger and destructive urges. They can hurt somebody deeply in the most personal and powerful way they can find.

If you want to stop rape, then we should educate men on emotional management, on seeking therapy when required (so much harder for men than women), help teenage boys develop consequential thinking and better problem solving skills. Avoid them getting to a place where they want to hurt others - especially women.

OP I don't think you need to worry about your sons if you are emotionally available and have a good attachment bond with them. This helps them deal appropriately with their emotions and know how to manage problems when they arise. If they know it is ok to seek help then emotional issues can be resolved.

I think we should send all professionals working in the criminal justice system to classes on consent and rape myth acceptance.. although I'm still not sure it would change much.