~ archived since 2018 ~

Semantogymnastics about Microconsent: on radical politicising of sexual consent

Monky11

January 23, 2018

8 upvotes

/r/MensRights

Archived from /r/MensRights

r/MensRights is a community advocating for the social and legal equality of men and boys since 2008.

TheRedArchive is an archive of Red Pill subreddits and blogs. This page is our copy of the original post.

/r/MensRights archive

Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB

Support the archive

Everything here was supposed to disappear. Banned subreddits, deleted communities, cancelled blogs — much of what is archived here survives nowhere else.

It stays free — no paywall, no account — for the next man who comes looking, the way it was free for you.

I pay for the servers, the storage and the bandwidth myself. If you want this record still standing in ten years, become one of the people who keeps it online.

Support the archive

Post Information

Title	Semantogymnastics about Microconsent: on radical politicising of sexual consent
Author	Monky11
Upvotes	8
Comments	1
Date	January 23, 2018 4:30 AM UTC (8 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/7sbxg4/semantogymnastics_about_microconsent_on_radical/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/semantogymnastics-about-microconsent-on-radical.1179928 https://theredarchive.com/post/1179928

Comments

[–]armaadi 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I like this article, and it expresses a lot of my thoughts. I don't think continuous enthusiastic consent advocates are really interested in making sure most sexual interactions are safe and consenting. It seems they are interested in catching men at some point and calling them rapists. Instead of empowering women to be able to say no, mean no, and not back down when saying no, they are initializing women by saying if they at any point, for any reason don't say yes, then it's rape. If they say yes, but unenthusiastically, that's grounds for rape.

I get that a guy shouldn't necessarily proceed with a woman that's not really enthusiastic, but that doesn't mean that's grounds for rape. She could be totally into it but nervous as hell, so she's temporarily frozen up. She could just be a lousy lay and just wants to lay back and let him do his thing. There's lots of reasons why women aren't responsive as enthusiastic and yes means yes advocates that women should be.

That may be true, but sexuality purified of the ambiguous language of sexual signalling, irrational passion, tease and innuendo is no longer sexuality but a medical procedure.

I'm 99% sure most women would hate it if sex were as interesting as a medical procedure. I wonder if these feminists would still advocate for this type of consent if they were the ones asking for consent.