In
a previous post, I made a vague promise to write a post on sexual consent, so
here, in my second hashtag-titled blog post (look at me blending seamlessly
into the modern world) is that post.
Now
seems to be the time, given a recent flurry about consent in the media (e.g. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-29503973
and http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/women-being-coerced-into-having-anal-sex-researchers-say-with-persuasion-normalised-9671395.html), in particular the notion of affirmative consent (saying “yes” rather than
just not saying “no” to put it in simple terms), e.g. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/29/yes-means-yes-california-sexual-consent.
I'm
certainly interested in all the various problems posed by affirmative consent (What
exactly counts as establishing it? Isn't it still one person’s word against
another’s in many cases of assault? Is this level of intervention in people’s
private lives too much, given that this seems to regulate how people consent, not only to insist that they do? And so on,
doubtless indefinitely). But what I want to write about here is one major
reason that the idea behind it is a step in the right direction.
The
naïve view of consent says that if you want to do something, you consent, and
if you don’t want to do it, you don’t. But even putting aside the problem of
what counts as consenting or as refusing, I don’t think it’s that simple. And the
main reason it’s not that simple is power.
Sex
is often about power. Some people love that and deliberately play on it, others
don’t but find it hard to avoid. It’s often the case that at any given time,
one partner has some power over the other. I'm not saying that that’s
inevitable, or that it’s good or bad in itself, just that it’s very often the
case.
When
someone with power suggests sex, or a particular sex act, to someone without
power, it may be very difficult for the relatively powerless party to say “no”,
or otherwise express refusal.
The
idea behind affirmative consent, as I understand it, is that if someone cannot
bring themselves to say “no”, their partner can’t just carry on anyway. Of
course it is still possible to feel pressured into saying “yes”, but keeping
silent (withholding consent) is much easier than speaking out (refusing
consent) for a relatively powerless partner.
There
are lots of reasons that someone might not be able to bring themselves to
explicitly refuse consent, including not wanting to be a disappointment to
their partner, feeling like they ought to want this because it’s what someone
normal would want, fearing that if they say “no” their partner will suggest
something else that they are even less keen to do, feeling that they owe their
partner this in return for something, fearing that the partner will leave them
if they don’t do what they want.
In
some situations, the power imbalance may not be temporary, but a permanent
feature of that relationship, where one partner always dominates. In that case,
there may be worse reasons for the powerless partner not being able to bring
themselves to refuse consent, including feeling that their desires are not
important, that they have no right to a say, or fearing that if they say “no”
their partner might carry on anyway and there is nothing they could do to stop
them. In that last case, allowing it to happen might make you miserable, but
refusing and having it happen anyway would make you a rape victim – I know
which I’d rather be.
There
is a particular problem here with sexual habits that play on the imbalance of
power. As I said above, there’s nothing inherently wrong with these things, but
it is important to realise that they can trap people. If someone agrees to try
being submissive just to see what it’s like, they make themselves the powerless
party, and once that has happened it can be difficult to backtrack. All the
safewords in the world won’t save you if you can’t bring yourself to say them
because you don’t believe you deserve the right. Powerlessness can get under
your skin faster than anything.
That
last part might sound like a specific criticism of the BDSM community, but it’s
not. People who know what they like are totally entitled to enjoy it with
willing others. The point is more about trying out something new, whether that’s
a new sexual practice or a new partner. That is the time when consent is
required, and the time when power imbalances are most likely to make it
difficult to withhold.
Affirmative
consent is a blunt instrument. It may be so blunt that it doesn't do the job,
as we currently conceive of it. However, its heart is in the right place. As an
idea, it exists to protect those who want to say “no”, but can’t bring
themselves to speak. They aren't weak people, or stupid people, or in any way
strange or abnormal. They are just people who currently don’t have the balance
of power in a sexual relationship with them, and that is something that could
happen to anyone, so this should matter to us all.
Even
from the other side – the side of the person with the power – this is
important. You want to know whether someone actually
wants to do what you are offering, not just for them to say that they do. (If not, you are a sex
offender in all but name). So establishing real and genuine consent is
essential for both parties. Any initiative that tries to help with that is to
be applauded. So if you have concerns about the notion of affirmative consent
as it’s currently being employed, voice those concerns in a way that could help
make it better, or offer an alternative. Don’t dismiss and deride the whole
idea, because this is something that should matter to every decent person. Let’s
at least start a conversation.
