This idea emerged around the time "yes means yes" laws appeared in Europe, sparked by the observation that men and women seem to struggle to agree on what actually constitutes consent.

Rather than rehashing the usual arguments from each side, I took a step back and asked: What if we're not even talking about the same thing?

It's well-documented that women's consent in society is constrained by their gender. They face pressures to comply with men's desires whether out of fear, societal duty, or a sense of self-worth tied to their attractiveness. They know they have the option to consent, but often find that option denied.

But what about men? How do we understand OUR OWN consent?

As boys, we grew up hearing from other men that any female attention is welcome regardless of whether we even like girls yet, or whether the other party is an adult. We call boys "lucky" even when they're sexually assaulted. We obsess over the who, when, and how, but never ask if they wanted it. And women reinforce this too, repeating again and again that "all men are dogs" who only want sex.

So, by the time that boy reaches puberty and his first sexual experience arrives, the question "Do I want to have sex?" never even crosses his mind. Instead, it becomes: "Why wouldn't I want to have sex?"

That fundamental difference, I believe, is why we struggle so much to understand each other. Women contemplate their option to consent, but society denies them. Men suppress their option to consent entirely without any external restrictions forcing them to.

We're essentially living in two different realities. Talking to men about consent without internalizing their experience is like asking a fish if it likes being underwater.