Yep. Came here to say what u/lurkerhasarisen said, but let me add:

If you are afraid to say "no" to sexual pressure from men, you should not be allowed anywhere near men. You should not be allowed in public unchaperoned and you need constant adult supervision.

All of life involves pressure from men. All of life involves other people trying to pressure you to do things, say things, take positions, and make decisions. If you are afraid to deal with it, then you should not be allowed to deal with men. Your father and the other men in your family should pick the men you date and the man you marry. (Gee, if only something like that had been tried...)

Grow the F up, ladies. Either you're a grown ass adult, or you are not. If you are, then own your shit and take responsibility for your decisions. That includes responsibility for your "yes" and your "no".

This is why women and their sycophant men push for "yes means yes" and "enthusiastic consent" laws. This is why they want "yes means yes" to replace "no means no". "No means no" recognizes how sexual encounters get started and proceed: Man initiates and escalates. Her proceeding along with him is a tacit "yes". It puts the onus on her to put the brakes on and stop the interactions by saying "no" and then putting up necessary resistance. Her "no" means "no". Anything other than "no" is "yes", which recognizes women's passive, indirect communication style. If she didn't say "no", she's saying "yes". It recognizes how women consent to sex with men - when a woman wants sex with a man, she just lets him lead it and lets him do what he wants. She doesn't say "yes I want to have sex with you so let's have sex". She just lies back and lets him have his way with her.

And women will "want" sex with a man for any number of reasons. She really wants him. She wants a relationship with him. She's lonely. She's bored. She's horny. She's his wife and wants to please him. She wants to get pregnant. She's desperate and panicking and trying to snag a husband. She's in love with him. She wants an orgasm. She wants bragging rights. She wants to see if her friends are right that he's good in bed or has a huge cock. Whatever.

(Men want sex for one reason, and one reason only - they need to nut. And that's OK.)

It also recognizes that men move things forward through their actions - through sexual advances. That necessarily involves some pressure, some bumping up against boundaries and her personal space, and some crossing lines. Each time she allows him in, each time she lets him cross a line without objection, she's consenting. She's saying "yes". She's giving tacit permission to proceed.

To get there, he has to press. He has to move forward. He has to apply some pressure. The only way to know whether it's "too much" pressure is to apply it and be told "no". The only way to know the lines he won't be allowed to cross is to try to cross them and be told "no" or "step back to the other side of that line".

I know this because I've done this. I've run up against a woman's hard boundary and been told "no". I've crossed a woman's lines and been told "nope, step back to the other side". But on the other hand, I've also run up to the boundary and been given the sign to go ahead. I've crossed a woman's lines and been told or shown "OK". I've also been told or shown "go ahead and cross that line". The only way to know is to try.

No means no means men and women are each responsible for their actions. She's responsible to set the boundaries and enforce them. She bears the consequences for failing to set and enforce boundaries (sex she really didn't want, regret sex, drunk sex, unwanted pregnancy, one more notch in the "N" line). He's responsible to initiate and to advance, and for crossing boundaries in the face of a clear "no". He bears the consequences for failing to initiate and advance (he gets no sex) and for crossing boundaries after getting a very clear "no" and for not stepping back across the line after being told to do so (criminal liability for sexual assault). Sexual assault happens when sexual conduct happens without consent.

"Yes means yes" gives women ALL the sexual power, and none of the responsibility. He is responsible for his conduct AND for hers. He is responsible to get "affirmative consent". She is responsible for... nothing. She is not responsible even to say "no". She is not responsible for the sexual decisions she makes - he is.

It's all bullshit - and it infantilizes women. Do women really want this? Do women really want to prove TRP correct - that women really are the "oldest teenager in the house"? Do women really want to agree with TRP that women have no agency and should not be allowed to act autonomously and independently?