Aziz Ansari Doesn't Pick Up On "Non-Verbal Cues" and Gets Treated Like A Rapist

[henryp]

Are you sure she consented? 

Are you saying that allowing someone to take off your clothes is consent to have sex?

No. He's saying it's a non verbal cue. 

As the article I posted says, if you're going to rely solely on men picking up your "non verbal cues" to try to figure out whether or not you're wanting to get sexual, you better consider ALL the non verbal cues you're sending. Otherwise, use words.

I don't know that getting naked for sex is consent for getting fingers jammed in your mouth.  If you're into some non-vanilla stuff, there should probably be the expectation for getting more consent.  Just like getting naked on the counter doesn't mean he should assume butt-sex is on the menu.  Or that he can cum in your hair.  Or choke you.  Or etc...

The system as it stands is certainly it's 100% on the woman to stop everything and clearly state no.  But that system is pretty spectacular for guys who just want to use women as fuck toys.  And it seems like a system optimized for those people might not be the best.  

And what's wild, is that the current standard is that if he does cum in your hair when you really didn't want him to, that women are just supposed to write it off as a 'lousy lay.'  

--

It's interesting the Louis CK thing being a justifiable career ruiner, because he was a big name comic and others were not as big names even though he had consent.  Trying to imagine the situation, I think I'd feel a lot more vulnerable if I was naked in someone's apartment and he started doing some weird shit to me, than if Louis CK said can I show you my dick?  Because it seems like you'd say 'no thanks', and it'd be over.  Whereas with sex stuff started in a celebrities apartment, when you're already naked, who knows what trying to stop things might lead to.