Search Results: Being A Slut

You are browsing the search results for being a slut

How I Went From Being a Psych Major to a Sex-Toy Creator

By

alex-fine-janet-lieberman

Like many little girls, Alex Fine wanted to change the world.

Her approach was a little uncouth — by young adulthood she decided the best way to make things better would be to give people a better understanding of human sexuality. Alex and her partner Janet Lieberman founded Dame Products in 2011 to do just that — and to ensure every single woman could have an orgasm when she wanted one.

The women designed toys that could work WITH couples during sex to ignite arousal and pleasure. Their first product, Eva, launched on Indiegogo and quickly became the most successful crowdsourced sex toy in history. And Dame’s latest invention, the Fin, made news as Kickstarter’s first-ever sex-toy crowdfunding campaign.

“I grew up empowered by sexuality, but aware of its dark side. I have felt empowered by my sexuality since I was very young…”

Even very young, I was aware of my femininity. The only epiphany I ever had about sex was when I grew boobs. I remember waking up and being like, “Oh my God! I officially have boobs.”

I first experienced slut-shaming in sixth grade, when I kissed three boys in one night. They were all my good guy friends and they were like, “What would it feel like to kiss a girl?” and I said, “I’m a girl, I could show you what it feels like to kiss.” I’m an open person. That’s me.

It only bothered me the next day, when I got to school and everybody was talking about it. People were so mean to me that day and called me a slut. I did not kiss a boy for like two years after that.

I caught on early to the power of sharing stories about sexual experiences

In high school, I dated the same guy from freshman to senior year. I lost my virginity to him… and got HPV. I wanted to share what I went through with my health class. My teacher told me not to — she said it would be a really awful idea because kids can be so cruel. I told her that was wrong: “You are telling me not to share my experience and you are perpetuating the cycle.” I refused to shut down and pretend these things hadn’t happened. So I kept talking — and other girls started coming to me to talk through their own stuff.

As high school graduation approached, I was seriously considering becoming a sex therapist. I am so fascinated by the psychology of gender and sex and how it shapes our society. I wanted to be a part of this conversation. I ended up going to Columbia University for a masters in clinical psychology. It was during that time I realized this dialogue was one I wanted to have.

My goal was to figure out how to make the biggest impact

Growing up, my father really instilled in me the entrepreneurial spirit. It was a belief that there were no limitations on what I could do — and if I didn’t know how to do something, I could look it up on the internet and get the answers I needed. I think a good entrepreneur has this really ridiculous belief that they can figure out how to do anything.

I remember mapping possible futures out for myself in grad school. I could become a sex therapist, sex educator, teacher… And then I added, “I could make a vibrator.”

I circled that last sentence on my idea board. The thought resonated with me. My goal has always been to help people — especially women — feel empowered and aware of their own sexual identities.

So, it was in that headspace that I ended up working in a consumer goods company. I wanted to learn about what it means to be a brand and sell a product around the world — and that’s when I started drawing out what would eventually become the Eva hands-free vibrator for women to wear during sex in order to close the orgasm gap.

Complete Article HERE!

All My Son Needs to Know About Sex and Being a Good Man

By Megan Rubiner Zinn

When I was pregnant, and learned I was going to have a boy, my first thought was “Here’s my chance; I can help put a good man out into the world.” Utter hubris, I know. We only have so much control as parents and we often don’t know what we’re doing. I had no idea how I was going to do this, but I knew I was already ahead of the game, since his father was such a good man. When my second son came along four years later, it was my first thought again: another chance.

There are scores of qualities that make a good man, but as I’ve raised my boys, three values have consistently bubbled to the top: Be honest, be kind, take responsibility. I’m never more proud of my boys when they demonstrate these qualities, and as we’ve all learned the hard way, nothing will make me more angry when they don’t.

I’m about to send my 18-year-old son off until the world. He’ll be 750 miles away, on his own, and he’ll be able to do whatever the hell he wants. Whatever the hell he wants will undoubtedly include having relationships and sex. There is so much I want to say to him, and really, to every young man about to strike out on his own, so much I want to impart about how to be a good man in a relationship. Yet, really, it comes down to the same three things: be honest, be kind, take responsibility.

in love

So here’s my didactic list for my son, who is nearly a man, and anyone else who wants to listen.

1. If you like someone, tell them. Don’t play games. Don’t make them guess. Don’t make them question their judgment.

2. If you love someone, tell them. But not on the first date. Use a little judgment.

3. Don’t pretend to be in a relationship or in love to have sex. If you just want to have sex and fun but not a relationship, be honest about it. It’s up to your partner to decide if that’s what her or she wants, too.

4. If you can’t be yourself in a relationship, find a new one.

5. If you’re trying to be who you think your partner wants you to be, stop it.

6. If you can’t or don’t want to be monogamous, don’t commit to someone who wants monogamy.

7. Get to know your own body before someone else gets to know your body and before you try to figure out theirs.

8. Sex is about being open, vulnerable, and naked. It’s about trusting your partner. You don’t have to be in love. You should be in trust.

9. Sex brings responsibility, for yourself and for someone else. Don’t underestimate that.

10. If you can’t talk to a partner about sex, you shouldn’t be having sex with them.

11. Don’t overestimate and don’t underestimate the importance of sex in a relationship.

12. Figure out birth control before you have sex.

13. Learn how to use condoms. Not just that they exist, but how use them, how to make sure they don’t fail, what to do when you’re done.
Make sure you know about women’s birth control and emergency contraception. This is your responsibility just as much as it is theirs.

14. If you’re too embarrassed to buy birth control, you shouldn’t be having sex.

15. Sex doesn’t always have to mean intercourse. There are plenty of ways to have fun without a pregnancy risk, though these do often come with STI risks. I would enumerate, but I’m sure you don’t want that.

16. Don’t expect to be good at sex right away. Practice, practice, practice.

17. There are words for women who like sex and don’t hide this fact. Self-aware, satisfied, and good company are three that come to mind. Most women like sex. There is no such thing as a slut.

18. Don’t guess whether your partner is as satisfied as you with sex. Ask. If they weren’t, ask what they need and want. If you can’t, you shouldn’t be having sex in the first place.

19. Your partner has had some partners before you? Great. It might mean they know what they’re doing.

20. Laugh during sex. If you can’t, you shouldn’t be having sex. Sex can often be ridiculous; respond accordingly.

21. Consent consent consent.

22. Drunk, incapacitated, and unconscious people can’t give consent.

23. Porn is a terrible way to learn about sex. This is not what most men look like. This is not what most women look like. This is not what most sex is like. It’s a movie. It’s no more realistic than Star Wars or The Avengers.

24. If you’re going to watch porn, pay for it. Look for feminist, non-exploitative porn. It will be just as fun, just as effective, and your partner may want to watch it with you.

25. One night stands, hooking up, and friends with benefits: not everyone is doing this. Some people can have casual or anonymous sex without damaging themselves physically or emotionally. Some people can’t. Figure out which of these you are and which your partner is, and tread carefully.

26. There are more ways in heaven and earth to be a sexual being and to have relationships. Accept who you are, let others be who they want to be. Unless someone is being coerced or hurt, don’t judge. In their eyes, you may be the weirdo.

27. Be honest, be kind, take responsibility.

Complete Article HERE!

Slut Shaming

Name: Martin
Gender: Male
Age: 50
Location:
Thanks in advance for your assistance, Dr. Dick.
Here’s my dilemma; I’m so in love with my partner, he’s actually the man of my dreams. We met much later in life, he being 45 and I’m 50.
I was married before w/children, out now as a gay man and all is well with my children’s relationship.
My partner has always known he was gay, has had numerable relationships, and was a sexual addict. He has wanted me to understand his past in relationship to his level of happiness now, stating that he was a bottom slut only because he was never truly in love or satisfied.
He wants me to believe that “I’m the one” that has changed his life-long addiction to strange dick up his ass.
I can’t seem to get past his past slut behavior, and oftentimes get so pissed off because he wants me to meet and develop friendships with many of these past fucks (primarily because they were military buddies also).
Why can’t I accept his slutty past and stop the suspicions?
Why do I get so upset just knowing that he was a total bottom slut??
How can I get him to understand that I have no desire to know any more about his sexual past and just focus on creating our lives???
Thanks,

Martin, Martin, Martin! How you do go on, darling.bullshit

Take a look at your language, why don’t ‘cha? Could you possibly be any more pejorative when speaking of the sexual experiences of someone who has lived a different lifestyle than you? I doubt it. Look at how many times you use the word “slut” to describe the man you say you love. I’m gonna call you out on that. You simply can’t tell me you love someone that you have so little regard for.

Your man wants you to understand his past, but you won’t take it at face value. You belittle his experience, possibly because it doesn’t match your own very limited, sexually exclusive, predominately heterosexual lifestyle.

circle jerkListen, lots of gay men (and some straight men) have loads of sex for lots different reasons. Sometimes just for the fun of it…or, as your man suggests, just to be a big old bottom slut. There’s absolutely nothing wrong with that. One can be happily sexual without loving each and every one of his partners. And the sex can be really good too. Just as one can have very unsatisfying sex with somebody one loves deeply. Sex, intimacy, and love are not necessarily dependent on the one another. No need to make such a tangle of it all, Martin.

I also want to reinforce my belief that there’s no such thing as a sex addict. Compulsive behavior? Sure! Out of control behavior? You betcha! Self-denigrating behavior? Absolutely! Sexual addiction? No way!

Try for just a minute to extricate yourself from your sex-negative mindset by exchanging the notion of eating when you talk about your friend’s sexual exploits. Would you have the same revulsion if your guy said he had shared food with lots of other guys? Some of it was fast food that didn’t satisfy all that much. Sometimes he ate just because he wanted to, not because he was hungry. And now he wants you and he, as a couple, to be friends with some of the men he ate with. Sounds perfectly reasonable to me!fingering his ass

Your man is inviting you to open yourself up and see life and sex as most openly gay men do. This is fundamentally different from how some formerly closeted men see life and sex. If you let him, he just might help heal you of your sex-negativity.

Finally, jealousy is one of the worst human emotions. It’s actually a kind of hatred, you know. Sometimes it’s hatred of another, but it is always self-hatred. You say you love this man; again, I challenge you on that. It’s clear to me that you have a much greater love of your provincial notions about sex then you have for this guy.

Here’s a tip, Martin. Jettison the unhealthy attitudes about sexual expression and give your guy a chance to be himself, not the idealized man you’ve made him out be, or think he should be. You’d be well served by working with a sex-positive therapist to help you get over this. Do it now, because if you hesitate you will surely ruin the very relationship you claim to treasure.

Good luck

IS THERE A SPLINTER IN MY EYE?

Today, we visit with a pair of very disgruntled correspondents. How nice!

Have you ever noticed how some folks have an inordinate amount of time on their hands? Time they use to poke around in the lives of the rest of us poor, unfortunate, benighted souls. They love to point out the errors of our ways. Whatever would we do without these guiding lights? It’s always been curious to me how the least capable among us are always the first to set himself or herself up as the arbiter of proper and wholesome living, especially when it comes to sex.

Who was it that said, “remove the wooden beam from your eye first; then you will see clearly to remove the splinter from your brother’s eye”? Oh yeah, now I remember. I am in really good company today. 😉

And today, dear readers, I’ll not bother tidying up my correspondents’ spelling and punctuation. I want you to experience the fullness of their brilliance for yourselves. Besides, I’m too busy trying to dislodge this plank from my eye.

Hey Dickhead
I would really like to know who you are and what are your qualifications in sexual matters. I was just reading one of your replies to a young person whose lover is 17yrs older than her. I am so saddened by your reply. You advised her to have extra relationship affairs which we all know that relationships that incorporates a third party is destined to ruin and the couple is inevitably be living a lie. I do not know what sort of sexual development you had and how you’ve come to separate love and sex but you are surely promoting a negative in this case.
Sex is something that is for the relationship and that relationship alone, not to go all around town giving out at free will. Being a slut. Im sure there are different things that they together as a couple can do with out the help of somebody else. And like slutting around is actually gonna save somebody’s relationship, yea i see that happening every day.
Even if this is a hoax and not a real problem, I’m afraid it is in bad taste. I do not know you from Adam but please think before you answer any of these questions. The gay communities in many places and the gov’t have spent a lot of money in the fight with Aides. One of the things that was being promoted is finding one partner and sticking to him. The more partners one has the higher the risk. There is also the aspect of using another for selfish sexual gratification. Yes you may say It’s Ok if there is consent but really, Is it? After all we all know what happens to our feelings once we have had orgasm. You are a bad person. You shouldn’t be telling anybody anything.

Whoa, what a charmer!

What a dangerous and disturbing thing it is to be so judgmental about the sex lives oft21.jpg others. Isn’t it possible for well-meaning people to have a genuine disagreement on such matters without interjecting all the disparaging and rude remarks?

As I review my response to the person in question, I see I offered her a number of sound suggestions on how to deal with her sexual frustration. The thought, that she might discuss an accommodation with her primary partner, allowing her to seek sexual fulfillment outside her relationship, was just one of the ideas I had. Why did you focus only on that? And would you really characterize that as “slutting around”?

It’s been my experience that many long-term loving relationships continue to be successful precisely because the partners make adjustments for the inevitable disparity of sexual interests that develops between them over time. After all, accommodations and a healthy give and take are hallmarks of a well-adjusted relationship. And who says fidelity is a genital issue? Not me!

As the resident sexual advisor on this website, (you can check out my substantial qualifications in my bio) I offer advice on the problems that my correspondents present me. I stand by my advice. The people who write to me are adults. They can choose from among the helpful hints I offer, or disregard them all together. But it is certainly not my role to choose for them. So, if I had omitted the option that gives you such offense, I would have, at least by default, made part of her choice for her.

You defend your point of view from a position of fear. You claim that we should be sexually exclusive with one partner because there is a higher risk of being infected with AIDS if we aren’t. Is that the best you can come up with? Is that really why we should pair off with just one other person, because we’re afraid of disease? And then there’s this other curious comment: “After all we all know what happens to our feelings once we have had orgasm.” What are you insinuating about “us”? Me thinks you disclose more about your personal prejudices then you intended.

My advice to you, deary, is to sit down and take a deep breath. Your undies are in such a bunch, you’re beginning to screech. I also suggest that you suspend judgment, particularly as it applies to the manner in which others live their lives, or at least till you have more information about the intricacies of life, sex and love.

Good Luck,

Dr. Dick,
I am a 27 year old male that has never had sex or been in any kind of a relationship. I’ve looked but all I’ve found is that every guy I’ve met seems only to be controlled by his dick. I’ve come to the conclusion that all men my age are the same. It’s gotten so bad that not only do I hate my own kind but I hate sex because of what it stands for. I have even lost the need to please myself and I think of others as weak and pathetic for not being able to use their hearts. I know that sex is a healthy part of human life but why (especially in our community) is everything based on sex and/or crammed down our throats? Even the simplest of ads has to have some dude brandishing his schlong just to get attention. I can’t even enter a chat room without somebody asking me what my cock size is. I’ve come to hate everything we stand for and it’s left me cold and I tend to shut myself out of any function that is sexually related. Friends tell me to get off my high horse but I can’t see any reason to. Just by observing from up here all I see are a bunch of HIV infected rabbits that have reached the end of their evolutionary path because they no longer communicate with word but only with sex. I thought I’d grow out of this but that was seven years ago.
Cold, Clinton J.

Dear ClintonJ,

How in the world did you get to be so incredibly bitter and jaded at such a tender age?

jockbutt.jpgYour friends are right, puppy, get off your high horse. The observations you make about us mere mortals are more than a little skewed, coming as they do from your angelic vantage point.

Listen, it’s true what you say about our community’s obsession with sex. Kudos to you for pointing out the obvious. But hey, it’s not just us homos. Look around and you will find our entire culture is fucked up in this way. You can have a full and life-affirming sex life without participating in or being co-opted by the madness that abounds. You can, like others do, choose a life path that is both sexually enriching and adventurous without succumbing to a preoccupation.

You claim to be 27 and say you’ve never had sex? And you make this proclamation like it’s something to be proud of. I wonder, how much of this bitterness is just sour grapes? Like Bette Midler is fond of sayin’: “You’re crackin’ up from a lack of shackin’ up.” You need to get laid, doll. It’s as simple as that.

And what’s up with this? “…all I see are a bunch of HIV infected rabbits that have reached the end of their evolutionary path…”? Shame on you. Try pumping some life-affirming blood into those icy veins and see what happens. Do not stand in judgment of something you cannot or will not participate in. It makes you look like a bounder.

Good Luck

Rape Culture and the Concept of Affirmative Consent

March against rape culture

March against rape culture

Throughout most of our history, rape was a property crime.

Today we do not, in the modern United States at least, think of a woman’s sexuality as a financial asset. But that is a recent phenomenon. For most of our history, rape was not treated the same way as other violent assaults because it wasn’t just a violent assault, it was also a crime against property.

You can see this view–of a woman’s sexuality belonging to her father and later her husband–in laws concerning rape and sexual assault. It was even possible for a father to sue a man who had consensual sex with his daughter because he had lost the value of his daughter. Based on this view, value is lost in terms of her work if she became pregnant and was no longer able to earn wages, or in terms of a future wife for someone else because of this stain on her character. Men could not be held accountable for raping their wives because a wife was a man’s property and consent to sex–at any time of his choosing–was part of the arrangement.

Lest you think that these laws are ancient examples of a culture that no longer bears relation to our current policies on rape, spousal rape was not made illegal in all fifty states until 1993, where it still may carry a less severe sentence than other rape offenses. The tort of seduction was technically on the books in North Carolina in 2003.

This context is important given our current cultural attitudes toward sexual assault. To understand this culture and how it can be amended, we need to look more deeply at the historical understandings of rape and consent.


Force Means No

The framework for defining rape underpins our understanding of who is required to prove consent or non-consent. The Hebrew Scriptures, which established longstanding cultural norms that helped form a basis for what was morally and legally acceptable in early America, make a distinction between a woman who was raped within a city and one who was raped outside of the city limits. The first woman was stoned to death and the second considered blameless (assuming she was a virgin). This distinction is based on the idea that it was the woman’s responsibility to cry out for help and show that she was non-consenting. A woman who was raped in the city obviously had not screamed because if she had someone would have come to her rescue and stopped the rape. The woman outside the city had no one to rescue her so she could not be blamed for being victimized.

This brutal logic, which is completely inconsistent with how we know some victims of rape react to an attack, was continued in the American legal system when our laws on rape were formulated. Rape was defined as a having a male perpetrator and a female victim and involving sexual penetration and a lack of consent. But it was again the woman’s responsibility to prove that she had not consented and the way that this was demonstrated was through her resistance. She was only actually raped if she had attempted to fight off her attacker. Different jurisdictions required different levels of force to show a true lack of consent. For example, fighting off an assailant to your utmost ability or even up to the point where the choice was either to submit to being raped or to being killed. Indeed, the cultural significance of chastity as a virtue that the female was expected to guard was so profound that many female Christian saints are saints at least in part because they chose to die rather than be raped or be a bride to anyone but Christ.

Potential canonization aside, it was consistently the responsibility of the woman alleging that she was the victim of a rape to prove that she had fought off her attacker in order to show that she had not consented. If she could not show that she had sufficiently resisted, she was deemed to not have been raped. Her chastity was someone else’s property, either her father’s or her husband’s/future husband’s, so it was always understood that someone, other than her, had the right to her sexuality. The assailant had assumed that he had the right to use her sexually and was only a rapist if she acted in such a way that a reasonable man would have known that she did not belong to him. Her failure to communicate that fact, that she was the property of some other man, was a sign that she had in fact consented. Therefore the rape was not his moral failing in stealing another man’s property but her moral failing in not protecting that property from being stolen.


Culture Wars

We can see the effects of this ideology in how we treat rape victims today. Although we don’t necessarily require evidence of forceful resistance, it is considered helpful in prosecuting a rape case. Rape shield laws may have eliminated the most egregious examples of slut-shaming victims, but an innocent or even virginal victim is certainly what the prosecution could hope for if they were trying to design their most favorable case. One of the first questions that will be asked of the victim is “did you say no?” In other words “what did YOU do to prevent this from happening to you?” The burden is still often legally and almost always culturally on the victim to show that they did not consent.

There is an alternative approach that has been gaining traction on college campuses and elsewhere known as the concept of “affirmative consent.” Take a look at the video below, which elucidates the differences between the “no versus no” approach compared to affirmative consent, which is often described as “yes means yes.”

In this video, Susan Patton and Rush Limbaugh both represent examples of rape culture. The contrast between the views of Savannah Badlich, the advocate of affirmative consent, and Patton, who is against the idea, could not be starker. To Badlich, consent is an integral part of what makes sex, sex. If there isn’t consent then whatever happened to you, whether most people would have enjoyed it or indeed whether or not you orgasmed, was rape. It is your consent that is the foundation of a healthy sexual experience, not the types of physical actions involved. In contrast, Patton expressed the view that good sex is good sex and consent seems to not play a role in whether it was good sex, or even whether it should be defined as sex at all. The only thing that could indicate if something is an assault versus a sexual encounter is whatever physical evidence exists, because otherwise, the distinction is based only on the assertions of each individual. Again we are back to evidence of force.


What is “Rape Culture”?

Rape culture refers to a culture in which sexuality and violence are linked together and normalized. It perpetuates the idea that male sexuality is based on the use of violence against women to subdue them to take a sexual experience, as well as the idea that female sexuality is the effort to resist or invite male sexuality under certain circumstances. It overgeneralizes gender roles in sexuality, demeans men by promoting their only healthy sexuality as predatory, and also demeans women by considering them objects without any positive sexuality at all.

According to this school of thought, the “no means no” paradigm fits in perfectly with rape culture because it paints men as being predators who are constantly looking for a weak member of the herd to take advantage of sexually, while also teaching women that they need to be better than the rest of the herd at fending off attacks, by clearly saying no, to survive. If they can’t do that, because they were drinking or not wearing proper clothing, then the attack was their fault.


“Yes Means Yes”

Affirmative consent works differently. Instead of assuming that you can touch someone until they prove otherwise, an affirmative consent culture assumes that you may not touch someone until you are invited to do so. This would be a shocking idea to some who assume that gamesmanship and predation are the cornerstones of male sexuality and the perks of power, but it works out better for the majority of men and women, who would prefer and who should demand equality in sex.

This video gives a brief highlight of some of the issues that are brought up when affirmative consent is discussed and the difficulties that can still arise even with affirmative consent as a model.


Evaluating Criticism of Affirmative Consent

The arguments are important so let’s unpack some of the key ones in more detail. The first objection, expressed in both videos, is how exactly do you show consent? Whenever the affirmative consent approach comes up, one of the first arguments is that it is unenforceable because no one is going to stop sexual activity to get written consent, which is the only way to really prove that a person consented. We still end up in a “he said, she said” situation, which is exactly where we are now, or a world where the government is printing out sex contracts.

The idea that affirmative consent will by necessity lead to written contracts for sex is a logical fallacy that opponents to affirmative consent use to make the proposition seem ridiculous. Currently, we require the victim to prove non-consent. Often the victim is asked if they gave a verbal no or if they said they did not want the contact. The victim is never asked: did you put the fact that you didn’t want to be touched in writing and have your assailant read it? The idea that a written explanation of non-consent would be the only way we would take it seriously is absurd, so it would be equally absurd to assume that requiring proof of consent would necessitate written documentation. Advocates for affirmative consent don’t want sex contracts.

In addition, even under our current framework we accept a variety of pieces of evidence from the prosecution to show that the victim did not consent. A clear “no” is obviously the strongest kind of evidence, just as under an affirmative consent framework an enthusiastic verbal “yes” would be the best evidence, but that is just what the best evidence is. That is certainly not the only kind of evidence available. Courts already look at the entire context surrounding the incident to try to determine consent. The process would be virtually the same under an affirmative consent model. The only difference would be that the burden would be on the defendant to show that they believed they had obtained consent based on the context of the encounter instead of placing the burden on the victim to show that, although they didn’t say “no,” they had expressed non-verbally that they were unwilling to participate.

The shift in the burden of proof is sometimes cited as a reason not to adopt an affirmative consent model. Critics argue that this affects the presumption that the accused is innocent until proven guilty. Which is, rightly, a cornerstone of our judicial system. If this model did, in fact, change that presumption then it wouldn’t be an appropriate answer to this problem. But it does not.

Take another crime as an example. A woman’s car is stolen. The police issue a BOLO on the car, find it, and bring the suspect in and sit him down. They ask him “did you have permission to take that car?” and he replies “Yes, officer, she gave me the keys!”

He is still presumed innocent and, as far as this brief hypothetical tells us, hasn’t had his rights violated. It looks as though he is going to get a fair trial at this point. That trial may still devolve into another he said, she said situation. She may allege that she didn’t give him the keys but merely left them on the kitchen table. At that point, it will be up to the jury to decide who they believe, but that would have been the case in any event. He is presenting her giving the keys to him as one of the facts to show his innocence.

If a woman’s car is stolen we don’t question her about how many miles are on the odometer. We don’t ask if she wore a seatbelt the last time she drove it. We don’t care if she had been drinking because her alcohol consumption doesn’t negate the fact that she was a victim of a crime. We certainly wouldn’t force her to prove that she didn’t give the thief the keys. That burden would rightly be on him and we would be able to both place that burden on him and at the same time presume him to be innocent until he failed to meet that burden.

Adopting an affirmative consent model changes how consent is perceived. It is primarily a cultural change in understanding who is responsible for consent. Rather than making the non-initiating party responsible for communicating a lack of consent, affirmative consent requires that the initiating party obtains obvious consent.

That is how affirmative consent works. It wouldn’t require a written contract or even necessarily a verbal assertion. Context would always matter and the cases would still often become two competing stories about what the context meant. And it doesn’t mean that we are assuming that person is guilty before they have the chance to show that they did, in fact, get that consent. It just means that we are placing the burden of proving that consent was obtained on the party claiming that consent had been obtained.


Conclusion

There is no other category of crime where we ask the victim to show that they didn’t want to be the victim of that crime. A man who is stabbed in a bar fight, regardless of whether he was drunk or belligerent, isn’t asked to prove that he didn’t want a knife wound.

We need to change our cultural framework of rape and consent. When we are working under an affirmative consent framework what we are doing is changing the first question. Currently, our first question is for the victim: did you say no? Under an affirmative consent model our first question is for the suspect: did you get a yes?

Complete Article HERE!