#YesMeansYes

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.