User:Eleanorg/1.2/RWR/Annotation: Beyond Yes or No: Consent as Sexual Process
'Beyond Yes or No: Consent as Sexual Process'
Kramer Bussel, R. (2008) 'Beyond Yes or No: Consent as Sexual Process', in Freidman, J. & Valenti, J. (eds) Yes Means Yes: Visions of Female Sexual Power and a World Without Rape (California: Seal Press).
This essay follows Thomas Millar's contribution ('Towards a Performance Model of Sex') in the anthology "Yes Means Yes!". Like Millar's essay, it promotes a view of sexual interaction which is process-oriented and based on dialogue. For Kramer Bussel, it isn't simply that, as some feminists proclaim, "Consent is Sexy" (p.48). Rather, "consent should be a baseline, the rock-bottom standard for sexual activity" (p.48). Over and above this, Kramer Bussel argues for a type of consent based on active communication of sexual desires: "...an open dialogue about sex... is what this concept of consent, more broadly defined, is all about." (p.48) "The issue of 'consent' encompasses the ways we ask for sex, and the ways we don't. It's about more than the letter of the law, and, like all sexual issues, at its heart is communication." (p.43)
This "more broadly defined" concept of consent, which highlights the poverty of mere "legally valid consent" (p.44), bleeds into good sex advice in Kramer Bussel's essay. "The kind of consent I'm talking about isn't concerned just with whether your partner wants to have sex, but what kind of sex, and why... these are questions good lovers ask of one another." (p.44)
Kramer Bussel proposes even more practical models for negotiation than Millar does, suggesting the use of a "Yes, No, Maybe chart" to "see what you have in common" with your partner. Communication is highly priviledged in Kramer Bussel's ideal: "Further discussion can tease out the nuances of these desires, and if there's something one of you is curious about but not sure how you'd go about it, this list can open the door to that crucial conversation." (p.45)
Kramer Bussel takes a conversational tone which aims to promote this expanded view of consent not merely by pointing out the dangers of more minimalist types of consent, but actively selling its "sexy" possibilities. "by making absolutely sure your partner wants to be involved in what you're doing sexually, you're not only on the right side of the law but are going to have a hotter time in bed." (p.47)
Notes & quotes
- Asking your lover for what you want (eg, "fuck me") is part of consent. "The issue of 'consent' encompasses the ways we ask for sex, and the ways we don't. It's about more than the letter of the law, and, like all sexual issues, at its heart is communication." (p.43) Note: this differs from the legalist's view that asking for something is different from consenting to it.
- Not speaking up and demanding our lovers to do the same means we won't be able to have the kind of sex we could be having. Antioch College's ridiculed consent policy, which stated that "each new level of sexual activity requires consent" (p.44), perhaps goes too far but is right to priviledge ongoing consent that goes beyond a blanket yes/no.
- The poverty of mere "legally valid consent": "The kind of consent I'm talking about isn't concerned just with whether your partner wants to have sex, but what kind of sex, and why... these are questions good lovers ask of one another." (p.44) "...we do everyone a service when we recognize that consent is not simply a legal term, and should encompass more than simply yes or no" (p.44).
- Definition of consent blurs into good sex advice here, leading straight into suggestions of trying the "Yes, No, Maybe chart... Write down every sexual act you can think of, and categorize them into things you enjoy/would like to do, things you don't ever want to do, and things you're not sure about or might try under certain circumstances. Your partner also fills out a list, and together, you see what you have in common. ...Further discussion can tease out the nuances of these desires, and if there's something one of you is curious about but not sure how you'd go about it, this list can open the door to that crucial conversation." (p.45)
- "...an open dialogue about sex... is what this concept of consent, more broadly defined, is all about." (p.48)
- "As women, it's our duty to ourselves and our partners to get more vocal about asking for what we want in bed, as well as sharing what we don't. Neither partner can afford to be passive and just wait to see how far the other person will go." (p.46) Communication is vital to avoid making incorrect assumptions, and "by making absolutely sure your partner wants to be involved in what you're doing sexually, you're not only on the right side of the law but are going to have a hotter time in bed." (p.47)
- Some campaign with the line that "Consent is sexy", but actually "consent should be a baseline, the rock-bottom standard for sexual activity, and shouldn't necessarily have to be sold as "sexy" to count as something vital and important." (p.48). [ This seems to contradict the expanded definition of consent proposed above.]
- Essay closes with advice about how to initiate conversations and get active consent, and the opinion that it isn't just consent which is sexy, but the reasons behind it: " 'consent' at its best can be about more than just 'yes' or 'no'. It means not taking the 'yes' for granted, as well as getting to know the reasons behind the 'yes', and those, to me, are what's truly sexy." (p.51)
[[[[[[[[[ problem with wiki model: modification of a final document, it has to be 'improved'. These consent theories imply there is no wright or wrong, rather it's a politics of provisional assemblages which converge around common interests and desires - could it form the basis of an organizing model or enrich pre-existing decentralized models (Eg Multitude)? How does it relate to Git model of forking? ]]]]]]]]]]]