RE: Aziz Ansari Doesn't Pick Up On "Non-Verbal Cues" and Gets Treated Like A Rapist
January 18, 2018 at 3:03 pm
(This post was last modified: January 18, 2018 at 3:04 pm by Athene.)
(January 18, 2018 at 2:25 pm)Tizheruk Wrote:(January 18, 2018 at 1:49 pm)Hammy Wrote: No it isn't (although actually, yes, it is if I'm my not staying in the mood means I no longer consent). The most important issue here is what consent actually is. Who cares whether I'm in the mood for sex or not (unless I'm actually going to tell the other person to stop). The point is that if people are going to have sex then they have to be in the mood... and it's not necessary to kill the mood with affirmative consent nonsense if the other person has already consented by not saying stop when sex has already began.
What's next? "May I keep touching your vagina? Are you having doubts about letting me touch your vagina? Do you still want me to touch your vagina? Was that facial expression doubts about me touching your vagina? What that a cue for you to not want me to touch it anymore? And by "it" I mean your vagina."
I would expect her response would most likely be something like "Well I'm certainly not in the mood now that you've said all that weird shit."
The way you're describing consent... sounds far creepier.
if having to ask get you out of the mode . Then simply don't have sex there is plenty of porn out there . And not saying is no is not saying yes.
In answer to your question yes . As consenting to one act is not consenting to any act .
I would expect her response to be her response . It might be "No i'm not in the mood for that "No i'm not into that" "Maybe that far but no further " all response i have received because i asked first . And no i have never had a woman say "
As I understand it, affirmed consent is primarily promoted on college and university campuses, where casual hook-ups with strangers are routine/commonplace, AND where recreational alcohol/substance use, and/or binge-drinking just happen to be infused into the culture.
The notion of being required to continually interrupt sex in order to re-gain consent is a deliberate mischaracterization that's trotted by MRM activists and is eagerly accepted as the truth by those who are receptive to their message, as well as those who just don't bother to find out what it actually entails.
https://thinkprogress.org/what-affirmati...65b32b388/
Quote:Affirmative consent isn’t based on the idea that every sexual encounter is a rigid contract between two parties. No one is suggesting that college students need to run through a checklist before unbuttoning each other’s shirts. Instead, it’s more about broadly reorienting about how we approach sex in the first place.
