Relationship Woes and Advice XXVIII: Happy and Perfect!

[Anymage]

What is the purpose of enthusiastic consent? I struggle to see how the concept would reduce the incidence of sexual assaults or any of the other negative outcomes you listed on the previous page. It seems that it is just suggesting changing the widely accepted (at least in the developed world) of consent and adding to it an additional layer that is ambiguous as to what it means, and incredibly hard to ascertain whether it exists in certain circumstances.

Both parties judge the consent of the other as best they are able from all the verbal and non-verbal signals they are getting from the other person. If one person wrongly interprets those signals and wrongly thinks the other persons consents, then that other person states their non-consent and the activity was not being consented to stops. I struggle a little to see the downside to that.

Having mentioned that motte&bailey thing upthread, I can pretty comfortably defend EC (motte version). It may not do much to stop forceful, explicit rape. That's kind of incidental, since not all bad things have to be the worst thing. A more communication-focused outlook will help avoid awkward sex, pressured sex, and uncomfortable "doing this because it's what expected, and sucking up the discomfort" sex. Reducing things on that level is an admirable goal, even if it doesn't wind up affecting the amount of forceful, explicit rape that people are quickest to focus on.

[Chen]

Having mentioned that motte&bailey thing upthread, I can pretty comfortably defend EC (motte version). It may not do much to stop forceful, explicit rape. That's kind of incidental, since not all bad things have to be the worst thing. A more communication-focused outlook will help avoid awkward sex, pressured sex, and uncomfortable "doing this because it's what expected, and sucking up the discomfort" sex. Reducing things on that level is an admirable goal, even if it doesn't wind up affecting the amount of forceful, explicit rape that people are quickest to focus on.

Wait, wouldn't "communication-focused" outlook come from people explicitly telling other people what they do and don't want to do?

[Ifni]

Just for some context, to the people saying "how is this useful for preventing assaults, since people acting in good faith already pay attention to their partners, and people acting not-in-good-faith can still lie or ignore" - I believe much of the pressure for affirmative-consent rules on college campuses (which is where the California law that's been mentioned applies) is coming from the perception that a very common situation for campus sexual assault looks like:

-Both people involved are quite drunk, enough to have (at least) impaired judgement,
-One person is still sufficiently conscious to initiate sex,
-The other person is sufficiently incapacitated that they can't make either a clear refusal or a clear affirmation,
-The first person thinks "well, they haven't said no", and wants sex, so they go ahead.

(A very quick Google indicates a Stanford survey found that roughly 75% of responses that described sexual assault involved someone taking advantage of the respondent when he/she was drunk or high.)

If you can drill into people's heads that at that last step they need to wait for some variation on "yes", rather than assuming they can go ahead in the absence of a "no", then that seems like it could meaningfully reduce the rate of sexual assaults in this situation.

Furthermore, if that's an explicit rule, it can reduce the ability of purposeful rapists - people who deliberately go after drunk/drugged targets - to use "I misunderstood the situation, she didn't say no so I thought it was fine" as an excuse. And likewise, if waiting for affirmative consent is an official rule, it makes it clearer to victims that they can report an assault even if they didn't say no (e.g. because they were barely conscious).

[lio45]

Just for some context, to the people saying "how is this useful for preventing assaults, since people acting in good faith already pay attention to their partners, and people acting not-in-good-faith can still lie or ignore" - I believe much of the pressure for affirmative-consent rules on college campuses (which is where the California law that's been mentioned applies) is coming from the perception that a very common situation for campus sexual assault looks like:

-Both people involved are quite drunk, enough to have (at least) impaired judgement,
-One person is still sufficiently conscious to initiate sex,
-The other person is sufficiently incapacitated that they can't make either a clear refusal or a clear affirmation,
-The first person thinks "well, they haven't said no", and wants sex, so they go ahead.

(A very quick Google indicates a Stanford survey found that roughly 75% of responses that described sexual assault involved someone taking advantage of the respondent when he/she was drunk or high.)

If you can drill into people's heads that at that last step they need to wait for some variation on "yes", rather than assuming they can go ahead in the absence of a "no", then that seems like it could meaningfully reduce the rate of sexual assaults in this situation.

Furthermore, if that's an explicit rule, it can reduce the ability of purposeful rapists - people who deliberately go after drunk/drugged targets - to use "I misunderstood the situation, she didn't say no so I thought it was fine" as an excuse. And likewise, if waiting for affirmative consent is an official rule, it makes it clearer to victims that they can report an assault even if they didn't say no (e.g. because they were barely conscious).

However, the possible line of argument you raised in your first paragraph still applies to that "classic college case": if two people wake up very hangover on a given day and all signs points to them probably having had sex the previous night, if Person A decides to retroactively say they didn't want to, then there's nothing to stop Person B from saying "hmm, not likely, I know I clearly wouldn't have moved forward yesterday if you hadn't been willing/receptive".

[Crow]

However, the possible line of argument you raised in your first paragraph still applies to that "classic college case": if two people wake up very hangover on a given day and all signs points to them probably having had sex the previous night, if Person A decides to retroactively say they didn't want to, then there's nothing to stop Person B from saying "hmm, not likely, I know I clearly wouldn't have moved forward yesterday if you hadn't been willing/receptive".

Preemptively accuse the other person of sexual assault. It's the only way to be sure.

jooooooookiiiiiiing

[Liquor Box]

I think some people in this thread are talking about different (albeit overlapping) concepts almost as if they are the same thing.

Some people are talking about enthusiastic consent. But of those people, some (eg recherche) seem to be thinking of enthusiastic consent as requiring an explicit verbal confirmation that the person is enthusiastic about the upcoming act, while some others (eg Glass Mouse) seem to be saying that interpreting a person's body language as showing enthusiastic consent ("look at their face for signs of enthusiasm") is what it means, and some (eg Anymage), I'm not sure which they mean.

Ifni also introduced the concept of affirmative consent, which seems to me to be a different concept which requires both partners to actually state their consent, but that consent need not be enthusiastic (although it may be more likely to be than when it goes unstated).

[Recherché]

I'm actually really cool with non-verbal consent if it's clear. I just want verbal consent if things are looking iffy. My personal stance tends to come from a combo of knowing some people who are pretty uncomfortable with trying to read body language and failing and of being involved in kink where pretty much nothing can be taken for granted without prior negotiations. At the risk of TMI I like trying to pull on and get out of being tied up. I also like being bound pretty tight. If you just went from body language you'd probably get the wrong impression. And let's not even get into the fact that under certain circumstances screaming in pain as my partner hurts me is a good thing for me. Given these kinks it's a lot clearer I'd I use words than body language but if what you're doing isn't that complicated and you feel confident in your body language communication skills then non-verbal consent works great.

[Anonymouswizard]

Kinky stuff? You monster! Think of the children who might be reading this thread! What of they get interested in this sort of stuff!?

(Probably research or ask about doing it safely and making certain that they have their partners consent. Man, I wish somebody had talked to me want this sort of stuff when we were teenagers, I'm relatively open about being interested* in it but so few people are.)

* Yeah yeah, the virgin is interested in kinky sex stuff. Bite me, I already know I like some forms of pain.

EDIT: my phone autocorrected kinky sex into really bad things.

[Sivarias]

Preemptively accuse the other person of sexual assault. It's the only way to be sure.

jooooooookiiiiiiing

Sadly though, in the case mentioned above, that's almost what you have to do, because of the way that law is written.

So forgive me but it's been kind of niggling in the back of my mind but both you and Coidzor appear to be assuming that all relationships where consent is important are heterosexual and the man is the one who needs to persuade a hesitant/resistant woman. I will be the first to admit that my life is anything but average, however that's not been anywhere near a universal truth in my experience. So when I ask my girlfriend whether she's up for dominating me as part of kinky sex today, who exactly is infantilizing who? In another scenario that actually happened to me we had a potential threesome with a guy set up. The man got cold feet and started sounding unsure of himself and I showed up at his house in a low cut shirt and push up bra to try and persuade him otherwise. When he declined to change his mind, I went away and haven't pressured him since. Here exactly who is demonized by the expectation of enthusiastic consent?

Sorry I haven't been on for a couple days, semester just starting, classes being dropped that weren't supposed to be. Getting overrides and dealing with red tape. You know how it is.

First, you are correct in thinking that the heterosexual male initiating is my current frame. For two reasons. One, it's the most statistically relevant. Two it's the only frame I'm familiar with.

Second, when mentioning the infantalizing women thing. My reason for stating that is two fold. First, the law seems to be egalitarian on the surface, but it explicitly states that if a party is intoxicated they are UNABLE to give consent. Meaning if you've had ONE beer, you cannot consent to sex and by definition anything that happens regardless of signed affidavits and records of you begging for sex. You were not in your right mind and could not have consented because you weren't stone cold sober.

In practice however, if both parties are intoxicated, the man is going to be demonized because "men always want sex" as a cultural thing. And if the woman in question pressed charges it would be considered right and proper, but if the man did then he would be laughed at and/or have his charge summarily dismissed. It's a case were the law in question is frankly FAR ahead of the culture.

The other reason it infantalizes women is it states clearly and succinctly that even if she agreed to sex, she is not held responsible for the sex she had because she wasn't sober. Because they weren't sober, they were not responsible for agreeing to sex. Therefore the asker (who is usually male) is responsible for determining their prospective partners sobriety. It's bull****.

Regarding your specific circumstances, honestly why did you think that was ok? You stated he got cold feet and was uncomfortable, so you showed up in revealing clothes to try and seduce him into changing his mind? So just to be clear, he was uncomfortable and you knew that, and you put sexual pressure on him anyway? How does that jive with "Yes means Yes"? Sounds to me like a classic Red Pill tactic of overcoming "Last Minute Resistance". Which in your own frame of morality is definitely a big no-no.

In mine, it's fine. He seemed unsure, when before he seemed ok so you tried to convince him. You got a "soft no" and so pushed a little to see if it would switch to a "yes" or a "hard no" and you respected the "hard no". Honestly doesn't sound like a problem to me.

[Recherché]

Couple things I should clarify, first the reason I headed over in the first place was that the level of softness in that no was high enough that well it wasn't even a no so much as a lack of enthusiasm and I wasn't sure whether that was to certain specifics or the general idea until I got a chance to talk to him about details. Technically he still hasn't said a hard no but I'm not about to push someone that way.

Second he knew I was coming over and had agreed to that already, I don't generally drop over on people unannounced. He might not have known about the shirt but he knew that I was heading his way and I was interested in him.

I don't object to the idea of "Last Minute Resistance" on the basis that trying to seduce someone is badwrong. I am kinda weirded out by the idea that it's normal for women to be reluctant to have sex. If someone is reluctant in my experience that's about the time to start talking to them and try to figure out what's going on, not push ahead blindly. It's the difference between adding more oil to your car when it's dropping too fast and checking for an oil leak. One is about getting home despite the issue the other is about trying to fix any issues that might exist.

[Sivarias]

Which is fair. For the record I wasn't saying what you did was wrong, nor was I under the assumption you just dropped by.

I was trying to point out that your clothing choice was an intentional attempt at seduction when it seemed the man you were asking seemed to be reluctant, thereby seeming to violate your "yes means yes" morality. That being said over the internet it sounds borderline harassment, but no one except those involved have enough detail to make any kind of judgement call.

That being said, women being reluctant for sex is a cultural norm in SEVERAL places. In part due to sex negative perspectives, in part due to generally lower libido as an aggregate. (Please don't give me specific cases that disprove it. I'm talking about mean and median of data sets, not outliers. I know they exist, my mother for one.) A third part of it is the nature of arousal. On the whole its like the old country song. "I turn on like a lightbulb, you warm up like an iron".

To that regard, you run into the "I'm not in the mood" vs. "I'm not in the mood in this moment but I'm open to you changing my mind" problem.

I'd go into personal experience, but then I'd be a hypocrite.

[Anonymouswizard]

Honestly, because of some of the women I'm friends with woman being reluctant for sex strikes me as bizarre, or at least them being more reluctant than men. Maybe it's just me, or British culture, but women seem to be a lot more open about it then men are.

[Form]

The concept of enthusiastic consent has plenty of merit, but I don't think a blanket application is warranted. Even in contemporary western dating culture, women still tend to place a lot of emphasis on assertiveness in men and expect them to take the intiative based on subtle signals. Does that require mind reading? No, but it does still leave a fair amount of room for honest mistakes and I don't think it is reasonable to blame men for that or to expect them to shoulder the responsibility of changing our culture entirely by themselves. If we, as a society, want to bring about a change in contemporary dating culture and the way men and women interact with each other we should ask men to be more mindful, but also expect women to take a more active role. That means taking more responsibility, taking more initiative and being more clear and explicit in communicating their desires. I don't think any kind of meaningful change is possible unless both genders accept responsibility for it.

[Recherché]

At least in my personal cosmos attempting to seduce someone to an enthusiastic yes is not immoral under most circumstances. Yes, if there's a power differential where they don't feel they can turn you down with no consequences its not good, if you're seriously deceiving your intended about something to try and get them to sleep with you it's not cool or if it turns from persuasion to badgering that's a problem but without those circumstances trying to convince someone that sleeping with you is a good idea is kinda the heart of dating. I'm not going to touch anyone sexually until I'm pretty darn sure it'll be very well received but that doesn't mean I won't try to seduce them into enthusiastic consent.

[2D8HP]

...my phone autocorrected kinky sex into really bad things.

.


What are you teaching your poor phone?!!!
Or is your phone leading you to debauchery?

Or trying to frame you?!!!

You have a demon phone!!!

[Goblin Guard]

Dating in high school is frickin' HARD.
As someone with mild autism, I have p much zero idea of what people expect me to do.
I'm surrounded by all these smart, talented, attractive individuals.
And I have no idea what to do.

[2D8HP]

Dating in high school is frickin' HARD.
As someone with mild autism, I have p much zero idea of what people expect me to do.
I'm surrounded by all these smart, talented, attractive individuals.
And I have no idea what to do.

.
Your not alone in feeling that way.

Never been diagnosed, but that chimes with my dim memories of my two years of High School.

Well, they were many more that were attractive than smart or talented, but they were plenty that were smart and/or talented too (my High School had over 3,000 students).

I remember feeling very isolated amidst all the crowding, but I also remember that many*of my fellow students seemed to know my name who I didn't recognize.

Had a lot more dates the two years after I left school than during.

Just keep telling yourself "This is temporary, I'll get through this".

[lio45]

Preemptively accuse the other person of sexual assault. It's the only way to be sure.

Actually, joking or not, you're kind of correct that if you wake up with a crazy hangover next to someone else in bed and you have no memories of the previous night, the safe thing to do is say "hmm, I believe you may have taken advantage of me yesterday..." before they can get a chance to.



(Even safer though: drink, sure, but don't allow yourself to get that drunk. If you do you may do things you'll later regret.)

[Anymage]

Dating in high school is frickin' HARD.
As someone with mild autism, I have p much zero idea of what people expect me to do.
I'm surrounded by all these smart, talented, attractive individuals.
And I have no idea what to do.

What are you passionate about? What do you do to keep yourself outside and active? What social hobbies do you have? And of those social hobbies, how many involve girls that you don't see as potential dates?

High school is its own weird thing, where you take a bunch of people who are still trying to figure themselves out and dump them all more or less randomly into the same place. I could tell you strategies optimized for high school dating, but by definition that's a very short term outlook. (Plus, you sound like someone who'd stick too closely to the script and make the whole thing feel artificial.). Long term strategies to make future you moire datable are probably the best investment of your time now.

[dehro]

I'm surrounded by all these smart, talented, attractive individuals.
And I have no idea what to do.

I am fairly certain that this sentiment is shared by most of the people who surround you.
mind you, when I was your age I was told pretty much the same thing, and it didn't help me at all, despite later verifying that it was indeed true... so, do with it what you want.

[dehro]

Couple things I should clarify, first the reason I headed over in the first place was that the level of softness in that no was high enough that well it wasn't even a no so much as a lack of enthusiasm and I wasn't sure whether that was to certain specifics or the general idea until I got a chance to talk to him about details. Technically he still hasn't said a hard no but I'm not about to push someone that way.

Second he knew I was coming over and had agreed to that already, I don't generally drop over on people unannounced. He might not have known about the shirt but he knew that I was heading his way and I was interested in him.

I don't object to the idea of "Last Minute Resistance" on the basis that trying to seduce someone is badwrong. I am kinda weirded out by the idea that it's normal for women to be reluctant to have sex. If someone is reluctant in my experience that's about the time to start talking to them and try to figure out what's going on, not push ahead blindly. It's the difference between adding more oil to your car when it's dropping too fast and checking for an oil leak. One is about getting home despite the issue the other is about trying to fix any issues that might exist.

in my experience, and I assume that yours isn't much different, whenever kink is an option that is presented and/or more or less circuitously placed on the table, the best way to proceed is always to talk things through in as much open-minded and open-hearted detail as possible, establishing clear guidelines, safewords, dos and don'ts, hard limits and whatnot. I find these dialogues to be as important if not more important than it is to establish mutual attraction in the first place. If this isn't an option for some reason or if one or the other party shows not to be open to this sort of clear rules-setting, then I usually take a big step back.

[Anonymouswizard]

Dating in high school is frickin' HARD.
As someone with mild autism, I have p much zero idea of what people expect me to do.
I'm surrounded by all these smart, talented, attractive individuals.
And I have no idea what to do.

Yo, somebody else with mild autism. It's hard, especially as people are bad at communicating and one mistake can ruin a relationship forever (depending on the individuals, my recommendation is that if you have issues with touch explain them to your partner before the !#@&ing breakup speech*).

First, almost everybody has the feelings of 'I'm surrounded by all these awesome people' at your age, it took me personally until my early twenties to get partially over it (not completely, my entire messed up psyche is pretty much the reason my relationship bombed). Even now I still can't understand how people manage to find me attractive or intelligent.

If you're thinking this way now, then the best thing to do is to either ask out people you like and just try, because you will make mistakes. Yes it's scary when you don't know what's expected, and terrifying when you get it wrong. Yes, occasionally people will get annoyed with you for doing the wrong thing, not being perfect, or any of hundreds of things. Yes, it feels terrible when you do that, especially when you hurt somebody you love, even if you didn't know better. But each time you make a mistake, each time you get hurt, treat it as a learning experience.


If you'll excuse me writing this post has somewhat triggered me, I'm off to read a book for a bit. Will check in on this thread later.

* Sorry, still working through my feelings from my breakup last week, I flit between anger and breaking down crying. Feel free to ignore all but the general idea of 'tell people your problem's before it's too late'.

[2D8HP]

...First, almost everybody has the feelings of 'I'm surrounded by all these awesome people' at your age...

.
Wow, you were far more generous than I was.

There were over 3,000 students at my High School, and while I definitely had feelings of inferiority, I did not often feel my fellow High School students were superior, generally I felt my fellow flatlanders were "illiterate thugs" and the hills kids were "spoiled overpriviidged snots", more than 30 years later I'm still bitter about the physical violence from some of my fellow teenagers, and the social violence of being accused of "not really living here" because I knew nothing of a ski shop that the hills kids frequented (even though I dropped/tested out early I was an "honor student' at first and was moved from the "track" that most of my fellow flatlanders were in to the "track" that most of the richer kids were in), my fellow students in the "advanced" track were clear to me that I "didn't belong", and was "not one of us".

My High School was definitely divided on class and racial lines between the "flats" where I lived (where not a month would go by without my hearing gunshots), and the "Hills" (where you didn't)..

I hated the place, and felt that whoever kept spray painting "Teen Prison" on the wall near the entrance of the main building was right.

The teachers indifference to my being "jumped" and punched unconscious taught me the most important lessons of my time there, which was "Get away from this place".

My "exposure" to academics was of little use to me since it was never going to be fated for college, and I could have learned more with free time at the library anyway.

It would have been better for me have not gone at all.

[Sivarias]

The concept of enthusiastic consent has plenty of merit, but I don't think a blanket application is warranted. Even in contemporary western dating culture, women still tend to place a lot of emphasis on assertiveness in men and expect them to take the intiative based on subtle signals. Does that require mind reading? No, but it does still leave a fair amount of room for honest mistakes and I don't think it is reasonable to blame men for that or to expect them to shoulder the responsibility of changing our culture entirely by themselves. If we, as a society, want to bring about a change in contemporary dating culture and the way men and women interact with each other we should ask men to be more mindful, but also expect women to take a more active role. That means taking more responsibility, taking more initiative and being more clear and explicit in communicating their desires. I don't think any kind of meaningful change is possible unless both genders accept responsibility for it.

At least in my personal cosmos attempting to seduce someone to an enthusiastic yes is not immoral under most circumstances. Yes, if there's a power differential where they don't feel they can turn you down with no consequences its not good, if you're seriously deceiving your intended about something to try and get them to sleep with you it's not cool or if it turns from persuasion to badgering that's a problem but without those circumstances trying to convince someone that sleeping with you is a good idea is kinda the heart of dating. I'm not going to touch anyone sexually until I'm pretty darn sure it'll be very well received but that doesn't mean I won't try to seduce them into enthusiastic consent.

This conversation seems to be winding down. I just wanted to share some of my final thoughts. First: I agree wholeheartedly to both of the above statements.

Second, having a better understanding of the concept behind enthusiastic yes or "Yes means Yes" I can agree with the principle. The problem I have seems to be the ways it is being implemented into public and school policy. The one valuable piece of information that I pulled from this is to be aware of people that freeze when trying to initiate anything with them. They might be unwilling to move forward but unable to figure out how to express that feeling. For learning that piece of information alone I'm grateful for this conversation.

[ve4grm]

This conversation seems to be winding down. I just wanted to share some of my final thoughts. First: I agree wholeheartedly to both of the above statements.

Yeah, seduction is fine. Trying to change someone's mind from a soft no to a hard yes is fine. Not knowing when to stop is not fine. And convincing someone up to a reluctant yes and taking that as full consent is sketchy, depending on the relationship.

Second, having a better understanding of the concept behind enthusiastic yes or "Yes means Yes" I can agree with the principle. The problem I have seems to be the ways it is being implemented into public and school policy. The one valuable piece of information that I pulled from this is to be aware of people that freeze when trying to initiate anything with them. They might be unwilling to move forward but unable to figure out how to express that feeling. For learning that piece of information alone I'm grateful for this conversation.

Implementation into law is a whole other topic, and the lack of actionable evidence in most cases (besides conflicting testimony) means it will be a complex topic for a while. so no worries if you have issues with how it's being handled.

Awareness that some people may not have an easy time saying no (or communicating feelings to begin with) is probably the biggest part of EC that isn't intuitive. And it applies to so much more than just sex. I'm glad you got something useful out of this. Thanks for listening and learning!

[Tvtyrant]

So I had a crush on another grad school student a few years ago, but she was in a long term relationship at the time. She just appeared on my matches and I was wondering how to go about messaging her. We are facebook friends and spent time together during grad school, but haven't hung out in a few years. I'm not sure if there is a sane way to ask her on a date.

Some help would be appreciated.

[Amazon]

So I had a crush on another grad school student a few years ago, but she was in a long term relationship at the time. She just appeared on my matches and I was wondering how to go about messaging her. We are facebook friends and spent time together during grad school, but haven't hung out in a few years. I'm not sure if there is a sane way to ask her on a date.

Some help would be appreciated.

Just say hi and ask her out? Geez is not rocket science.

[Tvtyrant]

Just say hi and ask her out? Geez is not rocket science.

People here have pointed out that my attempts to start conversations are not elaborate enough, but a full breakdown of a dating profile seems weird when it is someone I already know.

[2D8HP]

People here have pointed out that my attempts to start conversations are not elaborate enough, but a full breakdown of a dating profile seems weird when it is someone I already know.

.
Tell her how you've changed, and how you haven't.

Or just forget the dating and "catch up".

But if you are interested in romance, use the word "date", not "hang out" or go out".

[AuthorGirl]

.But if you are interested in romance, use the word "date", not "hang out" or go out".

Interesting! Where I'm from "go out" means "go out on a date" (or even "be in a relationship," like: yeah, they've been going out for a few years) and is hardly ever used like "hang out."