Say "yes": the nature of consent in sex.

Meanwhile, stories of sexual violence (domestic and otherwise) have flooded the Russian-speaking press. It turns out that the question is more relevant than ever. The topic is certainly heavy and brings up many uncomfortable questions. It provokes shame and guilt. What counts as rape? What is worse: to be labeled a flake or to grit your teeth and endure for five minutes? What does it mean that "a husband raped his wife"? What does that even look like?

In reality, all these murky stories are usually not murky at all. And the question of consent is not like building spaceships. In most cases (not all, but usually), it's elementary to determine whether consent was given or not.

Four criteria for consent:

• clear "yes";
• active physical participation;
• equality of partners;
• the possibility of revocation.

1. Consent is a clear, confident "yes"

We are primarily talking about a situation where two people are just starting to have sex with each other, although in other cases (long-term relationships, marriage) the same points are relevant with some adjustments.

So, the biggest misconception about consent is that it is given if nobody says "no". Alternatively, that "silence is a sign of consent". One can understand how foolish this is by simply looking at the number of books (not about sex, mainly about business) that specifically teach adults to say "no", to refuse requests, to not agree to what they don't want or only partially accept. If it were so simple for everyone, they wouldn't teach it and millions of copies of such books wouldn't be sold, right?

For many, "no", "don't", and "please stop" are not just territory of unwanted sex, but a signal indicating that something totally out of bounds is happening. Such words are feared and not thrown around, but their absence does not mean that everything happening is equally liked by all.

Phrases from the last column are what we almost expect from men. It doesn't seem unacceptable, is not condemned, and is sometimes even rewarded. "Did not give up, pressed" — in that spirit.

In reality, these are banal manipulations and psychological pressure. Not a crime of the century, of course, but there is nothing good about it, and resorting to such tactics can only come from weakness, not strength. A person wants it so badly, is so desperate, so afraid of rejection, that they are ready to ignore responsibility and rudely and shamelessly push through someone else's boundaries, just to get inside.

Consent obtained in this way is not consent. It is the capitulation of the opponent who can no longer resist. Even in the CIS, where the culture of consent and ethics in sex is poorly developed, such actions sometimes result in jail time (for example, if there were threats or the girl was drunk).

It must be understood that a person who really wants to have sex with you will say "yes" in one form or another. They will say it with enthusiasm. And if they do not say it, they are either unsure, do not understand what they want, or simply do not want to.

Mmm, okay.

Well, alright.

If you really want to.

Compared to real consent, these phrases are like "instant noodles" next to chef's pasta. You probably wouldn’t even go to the movies with someone who shrugs and mumbles something under their breath at your proposal. Why do we set such low standards for ourselves and others in sex?

2. Consent is not only words, but also actions

This point often comes up when one or both participants have had too much alcohol or substances. A brain fogged by alcohol can easily give a drawn-out "yeesss" in response to a saucy proposition, but if the girl cannot move, then there can be no talk of consent.

A little alcohol is not a big deal (many cannot imagine sex without it at all, but that’s a separate topic). The cheap and angry rule here is: if a girl is so drunk that you wouldn’t trust her to drive your car while you are in the passenger seat, she cannot give consent.

One may be more active than the other, I agree, but if your partner is lying there like a log, there are two options: either she is completely drunk, or she does not want to be there. I do not consider the "log" option: even very passive people in sex show some signs of life.

3. Consent is possible only between equal partners

Consent is complicated (or becomes impossible) if one partner has power over the other. This includes pairs like teacher and student, boss and subordinate, adult and teenager, doctor and patient, celebrity and fan.

This is the murky territory where it's very difficult to determine whether consent was given voluntarily or under pressure (sometimes only in the mind of the consenting party). The boss proposed sleeping with the female employee (let's assume without additional motives, he just liked her), and she agreed, thinking it was necessary, otherwise she might get fired.

When proposing sex to someone who is dependent on you, consider that your "proposal" 90% of the time sounds like an order. Moreover, an order for which there is a punishment for non-compliance.

Do not put yourself or others in such a position. It’s just a couple of steps away from real abuse.

4. Consent can be revoked

We are not robots and do not act according to a clearly defined algorithm. "Wanted to, but then changed my mind" is completely normal human behavior, but in the realm of sex, "those who change their minds" (more often women) are particularly harshly criticized.

Thus, familiar phrases like "it's easier to give than to explain why you don't want to" (many women have real neuroses on this basis when they do not understand at all how it can be — to refuse to sleep together if the man wants) and "flake." The latter epithet is often applied not only to women who explicitly promised sex but at the last moment refused (which is certainly hurtful but does not negate her right to do so), but also to those who promised nothing, while the "ghosted" suitor comes to his own conclusions.

For example, when a girl’s sexy clothing, her attention to her appearance, simple friendliness, or pleasant relaxed communication is interpreted as a guarantee of something more.

Not even flirting. Not even if you are both naked already. Not even sex with the same person in the past. Or so-called marital duty.

By agreeing to sex, whether with a new partner or an old one, a person says: "Yes, I want to have sex with you now" (and then confirms this consent through active participation — see point 2), not "Yes, I will agree to everything you want, and this sex will be brought to the point you need, at all costs." The latter sounds more like slavery or the result of successful blackmail, don’t you think?

In summary

Consent is not just valuable, it is necessary, it is the alpha and omega of sexual relationships. The foundation on which everything else is built. If it is strong, many things can be allowed. The most risky and delicate games become significantly safer with it, even if in the end you don’t like it. You (both) can always say: "Well, I didn’t like it — and that's fine. We both wanted this, now we know how it can be."

When you are sitting with a new partner and are passionately kissing, do not pounce on her immediately, but first ask: "Do you want to continue?". She will appreciate the gesture of respect. And the answer will likely please you.