Have you been in a long term relationship before? I question this because its impossible to predict every conversation before hand to gain consent. That means that typically you are expected to know the person and read situations. That leads to times when words are not used but meaning is conveyed. Further, things may be said that are the opposite. Your view of relationships seems broken.
Have you been in a long term relationship before? I question this because its impossible to predict every conversation before hand to gain consent. That means that typically you are expected to know the person and read situations. That leads to times when words are not used but meaning is conveyed. Further, things may be said that are the opposite. Your view of relationships seems broken.
- Jul 31, 2018
- 4,457
- 4,193
- 136
Starbuck1975
Lifer
- Jan 6, 2005
- 14,698
- 1,909
- 126
SMOGZINN
Lifer
- Jun 17, 2005
- 14,359
- 4,640
- 136
I'm just shy of 10 years in my current relationship, and was 15 years into my last one when we went our separate ways, and no matter what was going on if she said 'no' or 'stop' I came to a full stop and asked her what was wrong. EVERY SINGLE TIME. Even if it was that she was just not feeling it I said okay, and stopped. because I am not an asshole.
This is how a relationship is supposed to work. You are supposed to make sure that your partner actually wants to have sex, and with you, and at this time. If you think otherwise it seems it is your idea of a relationship is the one that is broken.
zinfamous
No Lifer
- Jul 12, 2006
- 111,892
- 31,410
- 146
technically it wasn't "an issue" because the larger society defined that as "boys will be boys!"
Hence what happens when society eventually gets pissed off at the old rapey customs of history, decides this is actually no longer OK, but then of course the only alarming type of anger are the ridiculous types that try to pretend it was never really a problem and just how awful it will be for them and their children if they can no longer be as rapey as their ancestors were.
I don't know what to tell you. There is a world of difference between a no with a tone of play vs a no without. A no with a wink is not the same as a no with an angry face. If what you say is true, then I think you are being disingenuous that you have never gotten a no that you knew was not a "no".
Also, straw man at the 2nd part. You can make sure your partner wants sex even without spoken word. I suppose you have never woken up to a blowjob in your 25 years of relationships.
SMOGZINN
Lifer
- Jun 17, 2005
- 14,359
- 4,640
- 136
Pretty much all of my relationships have been very kinky, to the point of always having safewords. So, a 'no with a wink' would not be a no. If my partner wanted to say no they would do so in a way I know to mean no, by using her safeword. And if she used her safeword, even if she winked at me while doing it. Even if she smiled while she said it. I would immediately stop. That is the whole point.
(Viper1j joked about a written contract, and funny enough I have one with my current partner, because that is common in kink communities. It is even notarized, because we thought it was funny. Although it is not legal since we did it ourselves with each other as witness because we both happen to be notaries.)
What I am trying to tell you is that 'well she winked at me' or 'she was smiling when she said it' will not stand up in court. Unless you have some prearranged agreement you have to take the no seriously, and just ask. It takes but a second, 'did you mean no, or are you just playing?'
Both a yes and a no can be verbal or non-verbal, but it is best to accept a verbal no at face value. If you think they are playing, then ask.
Amazing how you went from "NO IS NO IS NO IS NO IS NO, AND IT MEAN NO" to "no with a wink' would not be a no".
Also, we are not talking about court, we are talking about a Christmas song.
Lets dive into the world you like to partake in, as its a great way to talk about this and you seem to have knowledge of it.
How many outside observers would look at situations you and your partner like to engage in, and think that there was no way both could be consenting? You and your partner know and trust each other and know that there is consent, but an outsider would still disagree. If you engage in any sort of BDSM, then its likely that you would have to read body language as gagging devices are not uncommon. It takes away the ability to clearly say things so you have to know the person and be able to read consent. That too would not hold up in court.
So, lets not pretend everything is so black and white.
- Jul 31, 2018
- 4,457
- 4,193
- 136
Thanks to the world of tech, you don't even need paper anymore.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech...ent-apps-let-users-agree-have-sex/1420208002/
It’s not the way it goes in the movies.
You're about to elevate a fling to the next level when you pause to whip out protection – no, not that kind – a smartphone to memorialize evidence your sexual partner has given consent.
Spurred on by the #MeToo movement and numerous reports of sexual misconduct on college campuses, developers have introduced apps that purport to supply evidence that "yes" means "yes," before or just about when things start to get steamy.
Such apps carry suggestive names – Consent Amour,LegalFling, The Consent App, and, YesMeansYes, among them – and at least a murky promise that you’ll be protected legally if a dispute arises after the fact. Putting aside the awkward discussion that would have to take place, whether any “contract” agreed upon before engaging in sexual intercourse holds up to court challenges is at best an open question and quite possibly dubious.
A chief reason: Even if consent was granted through the app, your partner could have verbally rescinded it only minutes later.
***
(I'm kinda seeing a breach of contract lawsuit here.. The money might help with the blue balls.)
***
“The problem with relying on an app to record whether consent has occurred lies in the fact that consent changes,” says Sandra Park, senior attorney at the ACLU’s Women’s Rights Project.
On The Consent App from Silicon Bayou, you enter your name and declare that you are of legal age and understand the laws regarding sexual consent of the state you are in. You further declare that the agreement is being made of your free will and acknowledge that "at this time, I do not intend to change my mind before the sex act(s) are over. However, if I do, it's further understood that when I say "STOP" my partner agrees to STOP INSTANTLY."
After you digitally sign the agreement, you are asked to hand the phone to your partner so they can read it over and sign the consent form. The final step is to take a selfie together to show that both of you are "coherent and willing participants."
Once agreed upon, the agreement is stored in The Consent App's "vault."
Of course, a potential weakness in any of these apps is ensuring that both sexual partners were sober enough to actually consent and not coerced at the time they gave that consent, and even if they were willing participants, that they did not verbally or otherwise indicate they changed their mind.
Still, when it comes to consent, technology appears to be influencing the conversation. Wherever you come down on the allegations of sexual assault facing Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, if such an alleged incident were to occur at a party today, there would be a strong chance that someone could have supplied some visual evidence that the party was taking place, if only to prove there was such a bash, who was there and whether or not the attendees had too much to drink.
“When you have a 'he said, she said' case, what often times people aren’t thinking about is the other thing in the room, the cellphones that are in both of those individuals’ pockets,” says Andrew Cherkasky a former special victims prosecutor who is now a criminal defense attorney focusing primarily on sexual assault charges. “What’s happening on the cellphones just ahead of it? Is the alleged victim giggling with a friend on Snapchat about the guy that she’s about to 'hook up with?' Is the guy using language with a buddy of his that’s aggressive in nature?”
Michelle Drouin, a professor of psychology at Purdue University Fort Wayne, concurs: “Technology, in general, is really reframing evidence of consent or evidence of sexual activity and some cases sexual assault.”
.
The sexual consent apps all seem to work a bit differently. On its website, LegalFling writes that “sex should be fun and safe, but nowadays a lot of things can go wrong. Think of unwanted videos, withholding information about STDs and offensive porn reenactment. While you're protected by law, litigating any offenses through court is nearly impossible in reality. LegalFling creates a legally binding agreement, which means any offense is a breach of contract.”
The company explains how the app works: You send an encrypted "fling" or a request to a contact or would-be sex partner through a messaging app or text and await the other person's response. You indicate your boundaries and sexual preferences through the LegalFling app, for example, indicating whether French kissing is OK or whether you’re willing to give and/or receive oral or anal sex.
If the other person agrees, the app generates a "Live Contract," which the company claims is legally binding, though whether this dynamic document holds up in court depends on the country where you live. LegalFling says you can change your mind, of course, but revoking consent is always done verbally and not through the app.
Your private agreement is verified using blockchain, the digital ledger technology that is the underpinning for cryptocurrencies such as bitcoin. (LegalFling is owned by a Dutch blockchain company.)
Drouin does see some positives in consent apps such as LegalFling that can serve as “conversation starters," especially for new partners.
"But again, it has to come with that caveat that we can change our minds at any time," she says. "This being used as any kind of contract is ridiculous and I don't think would be upheld by the law."
Of course, in a "he said, she said" scenario, having such an agreement could perhaps in a criminal case provide some "reasonable doubt." But it's not clear whether these agreements would be admissible evidence.
For his part, Michael Lissack decided to retire an app called We-Consent and is instead focusing on an app called Project Guardrail, which grew out of a site he runs in Boston called Empowering Victims. The idea is that someone who has been violated can record an encrypted, time-stamped video that can later be accessed by law enforcement. Once a person tells their story, they cannot edit their account.
"Tech cannot do anything other than help with evoking discussion, helping with prevention or assisting victims with the preservation of their story," Lissack says. "Consent must be continuous, and short of a chip that can read someone else's mind, we have no way to use technology other than on a moment-by-moment basis.“
(A video of her screaming "Yes Yes!" on every stroke would probably negate that.)
https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech...ent-apps-let-users-agree-have-sex/1420208002/
It’s not the way it goes in the movies.
You're about to elevate a fling to the next level when you pause to whip out protection – no, not that kind – a smartphone to memorialize evidence your sexual partner has given consent.
Spurred on by the #MeToo movement and numerous reports of sexual misconduct on college campuses, developers have introduced apps that purport to supply evidence that "yes" means "yes," before or just about when things start to get steamy.
Such apps carry suggestive names – Consent Amour,LegalFling, The Consent App, and, YesMeansYes, among them – and at least a murky promise that you’ll be protected legally if a dispute arises after the fact. Putting aside the awkward discussion that would have to take place, whether any “contract” agreed upon before engaging in sexual intercourse holds up to court challenges is at best an open question and quite possibly dubious.
A chief reason: Even if consent was granted through the app, your partner could have verbally rescinded it only minutes later.
***
(I'm kinda seeing a breach of contract lawsuit here.. The money might help with the blue balls.)
***
“The problem with relying on an app to record whether consent has occurred lies in the fact that consent changes,” says Sandra Park, senior attorney at the ACLU’s Women’s Rights Project.
On The Consent App from Silicon Bayou, you enter your name and declare that you are of legal age and understand the laws regarding sexual consent of the state you are in. You further declare that the agreement is being made of your free will and acknowledge that "at this time, I do not intend to change my mind before the sex act(s) are over. However, if I do, it's further understood that when I say "STOP" my partner agrees to STOP INSTANTLY."
After you digitally sign the agreement, you are asked to hand the phone to your partner so they can read it over and sign the consent form. The final step is to take a selfie together to show that both of you are "coherent and willing participants."
Once agreed upon, the agreement is stored in The Consent App's "vault."
Of course, a potential weakness in any of these apps is ensuring that both sexual partners were sober enough to actually consent and not coerced at the time they gave that consent, and even if they were willing participants, that they did not verbally or otherwise indicate they changed their mind.
Still, when it comes to consent, technology appears to be influencing the conversation. Wherever you come down on the allegations of sexual assault facing Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, if such an alleged incident were to occur at a party today, there would be a strong chance that someone could have supplied some visual evidence that the party was taking place, if only to prove there was such a bash, who was there and whether or not the attendees had too much to drink.
“When you have a 'he said, she said' case, what often times people aren’t thinking about is the other thing in the room, the cellphones that are in both of those individuals’ pockets,” says Andrew Cherkasky a former special victims prosecutor who is now a criminal defense attorney focusing primarily on sexual assault charges. “What’s happening on the cellphones just ahead of it? Is the alleged victim giggling with a friend on Snapchat about the guy that she’s about to 'hook up with?' Is the guy using language with a buddy of his that’s aggressive in nature?”
Michelle Drouin, a professor of psychology at Purdue University Fort Wayne, concurs: “Technology, in general, is really reframing evidence of consent or evidence of sexual activity and some cases sexual assault.”
.
The sexual consent apps all seem to work a bit differently. On its website, LegalFling writes that “sex should be fun and safe, but nowadays a lot of things can go wrong. Think of unwanted videos, withholding information about STDs and offensive porn reenactment. While you're protected by law, litigating any offenses through court is nearly impossible in reality. LegalFling creates a legally binding agreement, which means any offense is a breach of contract.”
The company explains how the app works: You send an encrypted "fling" or a request to a contact or would-be sex partner through a messaging app or text and await the other person's response. You indicate your boundaries and sexual preferences through the LegalFling app, for example, indicating whether French kissing is OK or whether you’re willing to give and/or receive oral or anal sex.
If the other person agrees, the app generates a "Live Contract," which the company claims is legally binding, though whether this dynamic document holds up in court depends on the country where you live. LegalFling says you can change your mind, of course, but revoking consent is always done verbally and not through the app.
Your private agreement is verified using blockchain, the digital ledger technology that is the underpinning for cryptocurrencies such as bitcoin. (LegalFling is owned by a Dutch blockchain company.)
Drouin does see some positives in consent apps such as LegalFling that can serve as “conversation starters," especially for new partners.
"But again, it has to come with that caveat that we can change our minds at any time," she says. "This being used as any kind of contract is ridiculous and I don't think would be upheld by the law."
Of course, in a "he said, she said" scenario, having such an agreement could perhaps in a criminal case provide some "reasonable doubt." But it's not clear whether these agreements would be admissible evidence.
For his part, Michael Lissack decided to retire an app called We-Consent and is instead focusing on an app called Project Guardrail, which grew out of a site he runs in Boston called Empowering Victims. The idea is that someone who has been violated can record an encrypted, time-stamped video that can later be accessed by law enforcement. Once a person tells their story, they cannot edit their account.
"Tech cannot do anything other than help with evoking discussion, helping with prevention or assisting victims with the preservation of their story," Lissack says. "Consent must be continuous, and short of a chip that can read someone else's mind, we have no way to use technology other than on a moment-by-moment basis.“
(A video of her screaming "Yes Yes!" on every stroke would probably negate that.)
SMOGZINN
Lifer
- Jun 17, 2005
- 14,359
- 4,640
- 136
That was a mistype. 'No with a wink' would still be no.
It is always a good idea to think about such things. It gives you a little perspective. It is easy to start thinking you know things that you don't actually know, so a good question to ask yourself is, would a fair third party agree with this. For this case I used a court because it is possible for you to find yourself defending your actions in one when it comes to consent.
Honestly we do a ton of things that the average person would shove us straight in the loony bin if they witnessed it.
Which is literally why we have a written contract saying we consent.
No matter the situation there is a way for her to withdraw consent, to safeword or action. If she in a position where she is unable to speak, she has hand signals. If her hands are tied, she has a bell she can ring, or a bouncy ball she can drop. We literally always have some previously agreed on signal for 'stop'.
nakedfrog
No Lifer
- Apr 3, 2001
- 63,061
- 19,371
- 136
Your contract would and does mean nothing.
The point is, that an outside observer would not understand the dynamics of your relationship and your actions and thus should not try and judge you and your partner. If one of you said that you were not consenting, that would be very different. What you are trying to do with this song is to claim that as an outside observer that you can judge lack of consent even though you know very little of their dynamic. Also, keep in mind that this is a song and not a real event. You would not only have to consider the imagined characters, the context of their actions, but the artist's intent.
- Jul 31, 2018
- 4,457
- 4,193
- 136
He didn't want her frozen corpse found in a snowbank.
Did you miss the part about it being "cold outside"?
nakedfrog
No Lifer
- Apr 3, 2001
- 63,061
- 19,371
- 136
No, he wanted to get his dick wet, and the cold was a convenient excuse to try and convince her to make that happen. If he was chivalrous he would have put on his coat and walked her home, or driven her home, or called her a cab.
zinfamous
No Lifer
- Jul 12, 2006
- 111,892
- 31,410
- 146
Technically speaking: the actual age of chivalry wasn't really known for consent when it came to marriage contracts, was it? (rather: the consent was between the fathers of the pair)
nakedfrog
No Lifer
- Apr 3, 2001
- 63,061
- 19,371
- 136
Starbuck1975
Lifer
- Jan 6, 2005
- 14,698
- 1,909
- 126
nakedfrog
No Lifer
- Apr 3, 2001
- 63,061
- 19,371
- 136
Starbuck1975
Lifer
- Jan 6, 2005
- 14,698
- 1,909
- 126
Jaskalas
Lifer
- Jun 23, 2004
- 35,918
- 10,250
- 136
Huh? Evidence of prior consent means little. It can be revoked at any time. Including a split second after providing it. All one must do is claim it was revoked. The accused must then prove they stopped at that exact moment. If you're guilty until proven innocent, and don't have clear video evidence... no amount of consent form signing will save the accused.
Vic
Elite Member
- Jun 12, 2001
- 50,422
- 14,337
- 136
The manufactured outrage wouldn't bother me so much if not for the people who fall for it.
Popular music lyrics have always been on the risque edge. Most people would find them downright shocking if they actually knew they what they meant. And I'm talking about Top 10 hits here. Get over it. If you don't like a song's lyrics, don't listen to it. Drawing attention to it only increases the popularity of that song, and gives fuel to the right wing media's faux outrage propaganda machine.
So stop doing that please.
Popular music lyrics have always been on the risque edge. Most people would find them downright shocking if they actually knew they what they meant. And I'm talking about Top 10 hits here. Get over it. If you don't like a song's lyrics, don't listen to it. Drawing attention to it only increases the popularity of that song, and gives fuel to the right wing media's faux outrage propaganda machine.
So stop doing that please.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter