# You don't need "consent" to have sex



## Firefly3000 (Mar 22, 2015)

I always shake my head when I hear people saying that you need someone's consent to have sex with them. I think that's the most harebrained and ludicrous idea ever. You don't need someone to give you permission. It's not like they're doing you a favour by allowing you to be intimate with them. The people who go one and on about consent are so full of ****. 

When a woman has sex with a man and she's drunk, these people say that the woman wasn't in a state to be able to give consent. Well, what about drunk driving? If her judgment is impaired when it comes to sex, what if she drives while drunk? And what about the man? If he's drunk, then maybe his judgment is impaired too and he should be let off. Anyway, who said that it is the woman's position to determine if sex will go ahead? The crazy idiots who talk about consent never want to answer that one because it exposes just how stupid they are. 

Imagine if you were walking in the park with someone, and one of you wants to turn one way down a path and go in a certain direction. You don't need to ask permission. It's not like either party is the boss of the other. It's not as if you would be imposing anything on the other person. It's just something that you want to do, so you can just go ahead and do it. 

And when two people are having sex, it's not as if one person is imposing themselves onto the other. Neither party has a monopoly on whether or not it goes ahead. It's something that you do together. You don't need consent, you need to be in agreement. Which is different. Each one is having sex with the other just as much as the other is having sex with them. Each one is having as much of an effect on the other, as the other is having on them. Regardless of who is doing most of the moving and who is doing most of the passive lying down.


----------



## SecondTime'Round (Jan 15, 2015)

Firefly3000 said:


> I always shake my head when I hear people saying that you need someone's consent to have sex with them. I think that's the most harebrained and ludicrous idea ever. You don't need someone to give you permission. It's not like they're doing you a favour by allowing you to be intimate with them. The people who go one and on about consent are so full of ****.
> 
> When a woman has sex with a man and she's drunk, these people say that the woman wasn't in a state to be able to give consent. Well, what about drunk driving? If her judgment is impaired when it comes to sex, what if she drives while drunk? And what about the man? If he's drunk, then maybe his judgment is impaired too and he should be let off. Anyway, who said that it is the woman's position to determine if sex will go ahead? The crazy idiots who talk about consent never want to answer that one because it exposes just how stupid they are.
> 
> ...


Wait a minute here......did you just compare rape with a walk in the park?

Silly Firefly!

:sleeping:


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

Paging Dr. Cluebat!


----------



## Lone Shadow (Aug 5, 2014)

> Neither party has a monopoly on whether or not it goes ahead. It's something that you do together. You don't need consent, you need to be in agreement.


And what you're referring to here is _consensual_ sex. Care to guess at the root word? Consent, if not given by both parties to the act, means that the act is not consensual, but rather forced on one or the other.



> Anyway, who said that it is the woman's position to determine if sex will go ahead? The crazy idiots who talk about consent never want to answer that one because it exposes just how stupid they are.


It most definitely is not "the woman's position to determine if sex will go ahead." That is determined by _both_ parties. If either party is against it, it's rape.



ETA: 1000th post! WOOHOO!:smthumbup:


----------



## Pluto2 (Aug 17, 2011)

What a great big beautiful world we live in.

Let us know how this works out for you. 
And what state do you live in, you know, just in case.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

Huh. The guy who "thought I wanted it" despite my screaming and struggling did not need my consent. I guess I kind of wish he had gotten my consent... or not.


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening all
On the off chance that this isn't a troll.....

There are lots of ways to indicate consent. In an established relationship, there may be a wide variety of activities that have effectively pre-negotiated consent. For example a woman might have let her partner know that she is happy to be woken up with oral sex. If so, his doing that is fine, even though it would be sexual assault on a stranger.

For complete strangers there is in general no assumed consent for any action beyond a polite conversation. There could be special circumstances (sex clubs) where some amount of physical contact is assumed OK without verbal consent.

After a date, initiating a kiss - by leaning towards the other person is generally within assumed consent, but only if the situation is such that they can easily back away or indicate non-consent. Grabbing and forcing a kiss is certainly not within bounds.

If it isn't clear in any particular situation, then ask.


----------



## Married but Happy (Aug 13, 2013)

OP, you're just pointing out implicit consent vs. explicit consent.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

So a lot of history is being forgotten with this topic. The reason that any legal or social need to discuss the topic is that historically there was lack of agreement or clarity on what a person (let us recall that not only women are raped) does and does not have a right to. My assailant believed that he had a greater right to decide that I liked it rough than I had a right to say No get the hell off me. The New Bedford rapists thought that they had the right to take because "she was asking for it".

There is a reason that this conversation takes place.


----------



## happy as a clam (Jan 5, 2014)

Ummm... interesting. :scratchhead:

But I don't think any courts in the land will be lining up to change their definition of "rape" or "consent" based on your arguments.


----------



## unbelievable (Aug 20, 2010)

Ok, so your wife is at the dentist's or doctor's office and she's sedated for some reason. The dentist or doctor can feel free to have sex with her? Your grandmother is in a nursing home and she suffers from advanced Alzheimer's or dementia. Is she fair game for an attendant to have sex with? How about your 12 year old daughter who develops a crush on her 40 year old male science teacher? I she fair game? Maybe a cop finds your 16 year old daughter stoned or drunk some night. It would be ok for him to have sex with her? 
Consent is a pretty huge deal and it completely defines the difference between consensual sex and rape. At various points in your life, you will not be in a mental state to be completely responsible for your decisions or for your own safety and you do have the right to expect that others will not take advantage of your compromised mental state. If I arrest you for public intox and in your severely drunken state you agree to give me your family car as a Christmas present, it would obviously be wrong for me to accept it.


----------



## Pluto2 (Aug 17, 2011)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening all
> On the off chance that this isn't a troll.....
> 
> There are lots of ways to indicate consent. In an established relationship, there may be a wide variety of activities that have effectively pre-negotiated consent. For example a woman might have let her partner know that she is happy to be woken up with oral sex. If so, his doing that is fine, even though it would be sexual assault on a stranger.
> ...


And, most women are raped by someone they know. Knowing someone can never be implicit consent to have sex.


----------



## JustTired (Jan 22, 2012)




----------



## unbelievable (Aug 20, 2010)

I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that if you were at a friend's wedding or bachelor party and got drunk and an Army Recruiter took advantage of your inebriation and signed you up for an irrevocable 6 year enlistment contract, you'd feel that you had been victimized. Maybe not an Army recruiter but a car salesman who sold you a Prius for $50,000.00.


----------



## Plan 9 from OS (Jul 13, 2012)




----------

