|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On November 10 2017 10:50 Plansix wrote:
Holy fucking shit. I don't have the right to try to have sex with my wife when she is shit faced and I'm not. That is super fucked.
holy fucking shit no one said that. every single decent person who has been in a long term relationship has at some point touched their partner when it wasnt wanted, was told get off me, and because they are decent people they respected their wishes. jesus fuck conversing with you will try any man's soul
|
Oh Fox News, this is some impressive shit. I have to say, I am surprised.
|
On November 10 2017 10:53 IgnE wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2017 10:50 Plansix wrote:
Holy fucking shit. I don't have the right to try to have sex with my wife when she is shit faced and I'm not. That is super fucked. holy fucking shit no one said that. every single decent person who has been in a long term relationship has at some point touched their partner when it wasnt wanted, was told get off me, and because they are decent people they respected their wishes. jesus fuck conversing with you will try any man's soul
IgnE, it appears this consent word is really freaking you out or giving you problems. So maybe you just do you and lets the rest of us who have done the required reading just talk about it?
|
Theres a difference between me coming up behind my girlfriend and hugging her and me coming up behind some woman and hugging her. That difference is that we're in a relationship where is okay for me to do that while she then communicates if its okay or not okay.
I don't know how you've been in a healthy relationship without good communication like that.
|
On November 10 2017 10:47 IgnE wrote:
you are overly focused on the "contract" qua contract. its simply an expression of explicit consent
Even the billionaire admits that the contract isn't legally enforcable and he just wanted her to think it was
|
On November 10 2017 10:50 Plansix wrote:
Holy fucking shit. I don't have the right to try to have sex with my wife when she is shit faced and I'm not. That is super fucked.
But what if she is super shit faced and she wants to have sex with you?
There's just too much difference in preferred sexual setting to be talking talk like that. You can't solve the issue of consent and the infringement of a sexual safe zone because you have people that do like being fucked while super drunk or asleep. I'm sure there are people that love borderline rape where you wouldn't be able to tell the difference if she's still loving it or is in terror.
I understand the crusade for protecting the weak, but you don't do it by slapping the non weak on the wrist, imo. You empower the weak. Is that power going to come from people giving and asking consent? Is the boss in KwarK's previous example suddenly not going to grope and kiss because the general rule is now you need to ask for permission to do it?
I'm pretty sure predators will stay predators no matter what rules the general public uses; it's the same thing for criminals. They don't give a fuck about the rules.
|
one way to think about fifty shades of grey and ana's mental resistance is that her mental doubt/disgust/disinclination is entirely performative for the readers' benefits. she never explicitly revokes consent and so within the world of the book, nothing is going wrong, consent is given, ana is a smart young independent pwrson capable of consent, etc. her mental soliloquys about how shes not sure she wants to do this just play the role of creating a safe space, where we all know that rape and coercion are bad. so the reader can experience the fantasy and place themself comfortably in ana's position while holding in suspense the objective reality so to speak of her reservations.
thats how fantsy operates. the fantasy has to achieve a reality and yet still be safe. imagine the book with total consent. no one would be interested. no one wants to watch a kink scene as an objective observer keeping in mind that consent is always totally given and that the whole scene is really exactly what the submissive wants. it only functions by holding this consent just out of mental reach while still being accessible if anything starts to get out of hand. the book would have been a complete failure if ana were a real person wholly invested at all times in the bdsm.
|
On November 10 2017 10:56 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2017 10:53 IgnE wrote:On November 10 2017 10:50 Plansix wrote:
Holy fucking shit. I don't have the right to try to have sex with my wife when she is shit faced and I'm not. That is super fucked. holy fucking shit no one said that. every single decent person who has been in a long term relationship has at some point touched their partner when it wasnt wanted, was told get off me, and because they are decent people they respected their wishes. jesus fuck conversing with you will try any man's soul IgnE, it appears this consent word is really freaking you out or giving you problems. So maybe you just do you and lets the rest of us who have done the required reading just talk about it?
you havent done the required reading! you said so yourself! and you are a liar to boot
|
On November 10 2017 11:08 IgnE wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2017 10:56 Plansix wrote:On November 10 2017 10:53 IgnE wrote:On November 10 2017 10:50 Plansix wrote:
Holy fucking shit. I don't have the right to try to have sex with my wife when she is shit faced and I'm not. That is super fucked. holy fucking shit no one said that. every single decent person who has been in a long term relationship has at some point touched their partner when it wasnt wanted, was told get off me, and because they are decent people they respected their wishes. jesus fuck conversing with you will try any man's soul IgnE, it appears this consent word is really freaking you out or giving you problems. So maybe you just do you and lets the rest of us who have done the required reading just talk about it? you havent done the required reading! you said so yourself! and you are a liar to boot
I'm not reading twilight fan fic.
|
why not? you are clearly shameless enough
|
United States43570 Posts
On November 10 2017 10:47 IgnE wrote:
yeah dude, a state that is assumed until informed otherwise. stop being obtuse
are you telling me that you always ask for explicit consent every time you touch your girlfriend?
Dude, no. Just no. Like you are objectively wrong here that consent is a state that is assumed until told otherwise. If you fuck people based on that principle and you try to argue that in front of a judge you will end up in prison. Assuming consent is how you end up naked and masturbating in front of a group of women who really aren't into it. Non consent is always the default state from which consent is the deviance, not the other way around.
As for consent with my wife, I read contextual cues to judge whether consent is being granted, or, depending upon what we're doing, ask. No different to how you would if deciding to kiss on a first date. In most cases the contextual clues are super easy, like if she's not in the middle of something or super mad at me then we're good, but I'm still not assuming.
But you should err on the side of caution, both for yourself and any partners you have. I was at a sex party last weekend and one girl there invited me to play with another girl who was currently blindfolded. I'd not previously played with the blindfolded girl and while it was probably fine, she was blindfolded and wasn't in any position to give me negative feedback if she didn't want me touching her. Rather than assume and risk being wrong 5% of the time I chose to wait until the blindfold came off.
|
This threat has reached a whole new level:
|
Norway28739 Posts
isn't igne clearly saying that once consent has been given it is assumed to be continuously given until retracted? not that 'you can always assume that you have consent to do whatever unless told otherwise'?
|
On November 10 2017 11:48 Liquid`Drone wrote:
isn't igne clearly saying that once consent has been given it is assumed to be continuously given until retracted? not that 'you can always assume that you have consent to do whatever unless told otherwise'?
why yes, drone. that is what i was saying.
|
On November 10 2017 11:48 Liquid`Drone wrote:
isn't igne clearly saying that once consent has been given it is assumed to be continuously given until retracted? not that 'you can always assume that you have consent to do whatever unless told otherwise'?
Even that explanation is not winning many marks in the P6 house hold. The very idea of assuming consent is not great. But i get what he is trying to say.
|
On November 10 2017 12:09 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2017 11:48 Liquid`Drone wrote:
isn't igne clearly saying that once consent has been given it is assumed to be continuously given until retracted? not that 'you can always assume that you have consent to do whatever unless told otherwise'? Even that explanation is not winning many marks in the P6 house hold. The very idea of assuming consent is not great.
and yet you do it all the time in all kinds of interactions with all kinds of people
|
On November 10 2017 12:09 IgnE wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2017 12:09 Plansix wrote:On November 10 2017 11:48 Liquid`Drone wrote:
isn't igne clearly saying that once consent has been given it is assumed to be continuously given until retracted? not that 'you can always assume that you have consent to do whatever unless told otherwise'? Even that explanation is not winning many marks in the P6 house hold. The very idea of assuming consent is not great. and yet you do it all the time in all kinds of interactions with all kinds of people
I definitely only sleep with my wife. This definition of consent is strictly limited to sexual intimacy.
|
United States43570 Posts
On November 10 2017 11:48 Liquid`Drone wrote:
isn't igne clearly saying that once consent has been given it is assumed to be continuously given until retracted? not that 'you can always assume that you have consent to do whatever unless told otherwise'?
Hard to tell with Igne. Also it's not clear what he means by consent given. Consent to give a blowjob doesn't imply consent to sex etc. And even for a single act, it's still a case of "make a reasonable judgement based on context and cues". If your partner starts freezing or being disassociative the reasonable judgement would be that something has gone wrong and you should check in with them.
It's not the biggest of consent fouls if consent isn't explicitly withdrawn but the person stopped wanting it, that's more of a good faith fuckup. But it's still something that does happen and you should be aware of. Best to continue to make moment to moment judgements rather than assuming.
Or if he's referring to relationships, same principle. Context and cues. The context and cues for consent for someone you're in a sexual relationship with will be very different than they would be for a stranger and you're using your judgement far more, but you're still not assuming.
|
United States43570 Posts
On November 10 2017 12:09 IgnE wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2017 12:09 Plansix wrote:On November 10 2017 11:48 Liquid`Drone wrote:
isn't igne clearly saying that once consent has been given it is assumed to be continuously given until retracted? not that 'you can always assume that you have consent to do whatever unless told otherwise'? Even that explanation is not winning many marks in the P6 house hold. The very idea of assuming consent is not great. and yet you do it all the time in all kinds of interactions with all kinds of people
I don't think we're using assume in the same way and that's causing us to talk across each other.
|
Norway28739 Posts
On November 10 2017 12:14 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2017 11:48 Liquid`Drone wrote:
isn't igne clearly saying that once consent has been given it is assumed to be continuously given until retracted? not that 'you can always assume that you have consent to do whatever unless told otherwise'? Hard to tell with Igne. Also it's not clear what he means by consent given. Consent to give a blowjob doesn't imply consent to sex etc. And even for a single act, it's still a case of "make a reasonable judgement based on context and cues". If your partner starts freezing or being disassociative the reasonable judgement would be that something has gone wrong and you should check in with them. It's not the biggest of consent fouls if consent isn't explicitly withdrawn but the person stopped wanting it, that's more of a good faith fuckup. But it's still something that does happen and you should be aware of. Best to continue to make moment to moment judgements rather than assuming. Or if he's referring to relationships, same principle. Context and cues. The context and cues for consent for someone you're in a sexual relationship with will be very different than they would be for a stranger and you're using your judgement far more, but you're still not assuming.
No it's pretty easy to understand what he meant by the context, and it being igne. Something to the effect that 'if you have established that it's okay for you to kiss your wife when you feel like it, or grab her ass when walking past her, or put your head in her boobs during hugs, or grabbing her boobs when spooning', then it's okay to continue doing any of those things until she shows discomfort with one of them. But if you've been doing it for a while, you can assume it's okay that you continue. He wasn't saying that 'because you got a blowjob once, you can demand it whenever' and if you were to assume anything to that effect it would be you being deliberately obtuse.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
