WEBVTT
Kind: captions
Language: en-US
00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:03.760
[Courtney] Hello everyone and
welcome back. My name is Courtney,
00:00:03.760 --> 00:00:08.720
I’m here with my spouse Royce. Together
we are The Ace Couple, and at long last,
00:00:08.720 --> 00:00:15.190
as oft-promised, I am finally going
to at least start the conversation.
00:00:15.190 --> 00:00:20.400
[Courtney] I’m sure we will not reach every
corner that could or should be explored. Again,
00:00:20.400 --> 00:00:24.800
we are completely unscripted, we are
just talking about our own thoughts.
00:00:24.800 --> 00:00:32.600
Please don’t take any of this as the end-all
be-all final say. Covered everything 100%.
00:00:32.600 --> 00:00:41.280
[Courtney] It is time to talk about consent. And as
it is Consent Month, we have started approaching
00:00:41.280 --> 00:00:47.840
this conversation in our last two episodes.
So more precisely, we are talking about the
00:00:47.840 --> 00:00:59.840
concept of enthusiastic consent and how I do not
think that is the most appropriate model for most
00:00:59.840 --> 00:01:10.000
asexual experiences. Now socially, in life, in
the internet, in discourse, enthusiastic consent
00:01:10.000 --> 00:01:18.000
is a phrase that I personally believe gets thrown
around so frequently that it’s almost become more
00:01:18.000 --> 00:01:29.360
of a buzzword than a tangible concept. But because
it is often propped up by sex-positive people,
00:01:29.360 --> 00:01:37.840
feminists, sex educators as being sort of the
pinnacle of what consent is and should look like,
00:01:37.840 --> 00:01:45.120
it should always be enthusiastic, I often find
that criticisms of enthusiastic consent, in
00:01:45.120 --> 00:01:52.120
that word, in that phrase, comes with a knee-jerk
reaction of, oh, so you don’t want proper consent.
00:01:52.120 --> 00:01:57.840
[Courtney] So I’m gonna ask any of you who have
that impression of enthusiastic consent as being
00:01:57.840 --> 00:02:03.440
the pinnacle, the end-all, ideal of what consent
is and should look like. I’m gonna ask you to
00:02:03.440 --> 00:02:10.880
bear with me as we talk through this because
I actually think I have deeper, more nuanced
00:02:10.880 --> 00:02:20.480
standards for what consent— how consent should be
talked about and educated. So I am in no way ever
00:02:20.480 --> 00:02:27.280
going to say we should have lower standards for
consent, but I do think— You know the old saying,
00:02:27.280 --> 00:02:34.320
all models are wrong, but some are useful?
I think that very much applies here. I think
00:02:34.320 --> 00:02:39.680
there are some people who are very new to
learning about the concept of consent where
00:02:39.680 --> 00:02:46.560
the idea of enthusiastic consent is perhaps an
aspirational goal or an easy one to latch onto.
00:02:46.560 --> 00:02:52.560
[Courtney] So I’m not even saying that that
phrase is always wrong or bad. But when we
00:02:52.560 --> 00:03:00.600
talk about it as the only way consent can be,
I think we do a lot of people a disservice.
00:03:00.600 --> 00:03:09.840
[Royce] Yeah, I think the word enthusiastic
is a very strong word that doesn’t encompass
00:03:09.840 --> 00:03:16.480
all of the ways that people actually tend to
interact, and because of that, some very real,
00:03:16.480 --> 00:03:23.040
not uncommon situations end up falling into
a gray area if you take that too strictly.
00:03:23.040 --> 00:03:30.640
[Courtney] Yes. And since we are going to
be thinking about this from the lens of
00:03:30.640 --> 00:03:41.600
the asexual community, obviously asexuality itself
represents a spectrum. And in terms of whether an
00:03:41.600 --> 00:03:51.360
ace person might be sex favorable or sex neutral
or sex averse or repulsed, That’s sort of an easy
00:03:51.360 --> 00:03:57.600
simplified way to categorize different corners
of the spectrum. That doesn’t always necessarily
00:03:57.600 --> 00:04:05.200
mean a sex-favorable ace is always going to want
to have sex. A sex-neutral ace is not gonna care
00:04:05.200 --> 00:04:10.120
either way, and it’s totally going to depend
on whatever partners they may or may not have.
00:04:10.120 --> 00:04:17.600
[Courtney] It’s never going to be as clear-cut
as that, but knowing that we have this spectrum
00:04:17.600 --> 00:04:25.600
of experiences in our community. We know there
are some aces who are never going to have sex,
00:04:25.600 --> 00:04:31.040
never going to want that. There are going to be
some aces who do want sex, and there’s going to
00:04:31.040 --> 00:04:38.000
be a lot of people in between with their
own nuanced experience. So knowing that,
00:04:38.000 --> 00:04:43.840
what does consent often look like in our
community? And some of you might think that
00:04:43.840 --> 00:04:48.720
my main critique of enthusiastic
consent will mostly be for like,
00:04:48.720 --> 00:04:54.560
a stereotypical version of what a sex-neutral
ace might look like, someone who’s like, yeah,
00:04:54.560 --> 00:04:59.520
I might be up for it, I could take it, I could
leave it, doesn’t really matter to me either
00:04:59.520 --> 00:05:07.520
way. Because is that a theoretical person who
would ever be completely enthusiastic, like, yes,
00:05:07.520 --> 00:05:11.760
absolutely, this is a thing I definitely
really, really want on my own merits?
00:05:11.760 --> 00:05:16.560
[Courtney] Not all the time. Not
necessarily. But I also think,
00:05:16.560 --> 00:05:21.120
and here’s, here’s where the
conversation is gonna get quite muddy.
00:05:21.120 --> 00:05:28.320
[Courtney] I do want to break into the FRIES
model because that is a model presented by
00:05:28.320 --> 00:05:35.680
Planned Parenthood that I have seen most
often the very well-meaning sex educators
00:05:35.680 --> 00:05:42.640
thinking this is the nuanced model and this
is what we should all be aspiring to. It’s uh,
00:05:42.640 --> 00:05:48.480
tossed out in a very prescriptive way,
I often find. But I also think the idea
00:05:48.480 --> 00:05:55.040
of enthusiastic consent and the way it is
often talked about also does a disservice
00:05:55.040 --> 00:06:02.240
to not only sex-neutral aces, but
a lot of sex-averse aces as well.
00:06:02.240 --> 00:06:06.640
[Courtney] So the FRIES model—
again, all models are wrong,
00:06:06.640 --> 00:06:12.720
some are useful. F stands for freely
given, and this is all directly from
00:06:12.720 --> 00:06:18.720
Planned Parenthood’s website. Consenting
is a choice you make without pressure,
00:06:18.720 --> 00:06:24.120
manipulation, or under the influence of
drugs or alcohol. R stands for reversible.
00:06:24.120 --> 00:06:28.640
[Courtney] Anyone can change their mind
about what they feel like doing anytime,
00:06:28.640 --> 00:06:33.520
even if you’ve done it before and even
if you’re both naked in bed. Informed.
00:06:33.520 --> 00:06:37.600
You can only consent to something if
you have the full story. For example,
00:06:37.600 --> 00:06:42.160
if someone says they’ll use a condom and
then they don’t, there isn’t full consent.
00:06:42.160 --> 00:06:47.520
[Courtney] Enthusiastic. When it comes to
sex, you should only do stuff you WANT to do,
00:06:47.520 --> 00:06:52.840
that is in all caps, not things that you
feel you’re expected to do. Specific.
00:06:52.840 --> 00:06:57.600
[Courtney] Saying yes to one thing, like going
to the bedroom to make out, doesn’t mean you’ve
00:06:57.600 --> 00:07:02.560
said yes to others, like having sex. Now I
genuinely do want this to be a conversation,
00:07:02.560 --> 00:07:06.880
and Rice, I’m actually going to ask you
because this has been stewing in my head,
00:07:06.880 --> 00:07:10.160
uh, for the last couple weeks
knowing this episode is coming.
00:07:10.160 --> 00:07:20.960
[Courtney] Does anyone else think that it is a
little bit a problem that so many consent models
00:07:20.960 --> 00:07:26.920
are— gosh, how do I even word this? So all of
these say you. Consenting is: you make a choice.
00:07:26.920 --> 00:07:32.880
[Courtney] Enthusiastic means it’s something
you want to do. So it’s sort of— I understand
00:07:32.880 --> 00:07:37.680
it from the logic of like, my body, my
choice. But it seems more often like
00:07:37.680 --> 00:07:43.840
it’s teaching you what I should look like and
how I should be and what situation I should be
00:07:43.840 --> 00:07:50.240
like when I consent. And because that’s kind
of the base for most of these conversations,
00:07:50.240 --> 00:07:56.800
at least the ones that often get requoted and
re-talked about, it’s not really teaching it
00:07:56.800 --> 00:08:02.520
from the other perspective of like, what does it
look like when you have been given proper consent?
00:08:02.520 --> 00:08:09.680
[Royce] Oh, do you mean like the model is
basically teaching a person to identify if
00:08:09.680 --> 00:08:14.640
they themself have consented properly,
but not to identify if a partner has?
00:08:14.640 --> 00:08:15.320
[Courtney] Exactly.
00:08:15.320 --> 00:08:21.840
[Royce] And to follow that, that would mean that
everyone involved has a proper understanding of
00:08:21.840 --> 00:08:27.520
this, which is not really the case. Not
often the case. Not sometimes the case.
00:08:27.520 --> 00:08:33.760
[Courtney] I’m gonna have one cynical take on this
and then one nuanced take on this, so bear with
00:08:33.760 --> 00:08:41.840
me. This is, from my perspective, this model
is either teaching you how to give consent,
00:08:41.840 --> 00:08:48.640
which doesn’t do you any service if you have no
intention of giving consent, potentially ever,
00:08:48.640 --> 00:08:58.000
or it’s teaching you, perhaps, in retrospect,
when past encounters may have started blurring
00:08:58.000 --> 00:09:04.480
the lines into perhaps you were coerced
in a past situation. Perhaps there was
00:09:04.480 --> 00:09:09.360
a sexual assault that you weren’t at the time
able to identify what that is, but now you’ve
00:09:09.360 --> 00:09:15.800
been given the language like, oh well, it
wasn’t enthusiastic, or it wasn’t informed.
00:09:15.800 --> 00:09:21.200
[Courtney] And for those reasons, I
think this can be valuable. However,
00:09:21.200 --> 00:09:27.240
I have had so many conversations with
so many ace people over the years.
00:09:27.240 --> 00:09:34.480
[Courtney] And a fairly common asexual
experience is attempting, sometimes for years,
00:09:34.480 --> 00:09:40.400
to fit into an allosexual world and an allosexual
framework and attempting to have relationships
00:09:40.400 --> 00:09:45.840
that maybe you don’t want or don’t work for
you. And I have heard time and time again,
00:09:45.840 --> 00:09:51.280
and it is so hard for aces to actually
talk about this publicly, so these have
00:09:51.280 --> 00:09:58.720
all been private conversations, where aces
in a safe space can commiserate like this,
00:09:58.720 --> 00:10:04.640
where they say, yeah, I’ve always been
taught that consent should be enthusiastic,
00:10:04.640 --> 00:10:12.080
so I learned how to perform enthusiasm even
though that wasn’t what I actually wanted.
00:10:12.080 --> 00:10:20.800
And in situations like that, it can still be very
damaging. It can still feel very violating. It can
00:10:20.800 --> 00:10:28.800
still— Cause psychological ramifications down
the road. But one thing that models like this
00:10:28.800 --> 00:10:38.400
fail to encapsulate is the fact that, yes, on a
very surface level, in individual interactions,
00:10:38.400 --> 00:10:45.240
whether it’s two people or more, theoretically,
yes, consent is— let’s say two people in bed.
00:10:45.240 --> 00:10:49.040
[Courtney] Do you want to do this?
Yes, I do. Great, me too. Let’s do it.
00:10:49.040 --> 00:10:58.560
[Courtney] But there are larger overarching
social structures that complicate this a lot
00:10:58.560 --> 00:11:05.760
more than any of these individual consent models
that get thrown around can account for. And that
00:11:05.760 --> 00:11:12.360
is that the social rules do kind of change
with the establishment of a relationship.
00:11:12.360 --> 00:11:19.280
[Courtney] I’m not saying it should. I don’t
think it should. But it does. And if any of
00:11:19.280 --> 00:11:25.000
you recoil at that thought, I implore you
to just think through it a little longer.
00:11:25.000 --> 00:11:30.800
[Courtney] We’ve talked about this for
years where even legally speaking,
00:11:30.800 --> 00:11:38.880
there are marriage consummation laws. There are
situations where if a married couple does not
00:11:38.880 --> 00:11:45.760
have sex, the marriage may not have been legally
binding in the first place, it can be annulled.
00:11:45.760 --> 00:11:54.640
There are situations where, in cases of divorce,
one spouse can be found at fault for withholding
00:11:54.640 --> 00:12:03.040
sex, because that is what happens in our world if
a relationship, an ongoing long-term relationship
00:12:03.040 --> 00:12:09.920
has been established. The base assumption at
a society-wide level is that it is a sexual
00:12:09.920 --> 00:12:16.400
relationship. And think about all the posts
we’ve been over in dead bedrooms, you know,
00:12:16.400 --> 00:12:24.960
It’s always the person who is not having sex with
their partner who is withholding sex, who is being
00:12:24.960 --> 00:12:33.600
selfish, who is forcing the other person to remain
celibate. These are all words that are used.
00:12:33.600 --> 00:12:39.840
[Courtney] And since in a comprehensive sex
education, yes, of course consent should be talked
00:12:39.840 --> 00:12:47.360
about and that should be something we educate on,
the goal in most cases of proper sex education is
00:12:47.360 --> 00:12:55.520
to have those conversations with young people
before they get to that point so that they know
00:12:55.520 --> 00:13:01.280
what to look for or they know how to behave or how
they know how to, you know, I don’t even know if
00:13:01.280 --> 00:13:07.840
I want to give it credit for keeping yourself
safe because you can in your head know all the
00:13:07.840 --> 00:13:14.240
right ways to give consent and what it should look
like and dangerous situations can still happen. It
00:13:14.240 --> 00:13:19.480
doesn’t mean you will be safe from all of those
things just because you are educated on them.
00:13:19.480 --> 00:13:25.680
[Royce] Yeah, I think the aspect of it that
it leans to personal safety is helping
00:13:25.680 --> 00:13:31.200
someone who may not understand clarify
their own boundaries a little better.
00:13:31.200 --> 00:13:37.040
[Courtney] Correct. Which, clarifying your own
boundaries is great when you’re with someone
00:13:37.040 --> 00:13:43.040
who respects those boundaries. And so in a lot
of these situations, these conversations about
00:13:43.040 --> 00:13:51.040
consent, it’s talked about as either a first
encounter, a casual encounter. You hear it
00:13:51.040 --> 00:13:58.400
talked about a lot in like the kink community
or people who are having a lot of casual sex,
00:13:58.400 --> 00:14:02.800
one-night stands, how to keep yourself safe
and understand consent in those situations
00:14:02.800 --> 00:14:08.640
where perhaps you have many sexual partners.
But I think, and maybe not even for aces,
00:14:08.640 --> 00:14:18.360
but I think a lot of these models don’t do justice
to the ongoingness of a long-term relationship.
00:14:18.360 --> 00:14:23.440
[Courtney] Because think about the same phrase in
two different contexts. One phrase you might hear
00:14:23.440 --> 00:14:30.000
is, no means no, or no is a complete sentence, no
is a complete answer. You’ll hear those things.
00:14:30.000 --> 00:14:35.440
[Courtney] On a first date with someone
and they ask to go back to your place? No.
00:14:35.440 --> 00:14:37.520
Great, that’s a full answer. That makes sense.
00:14:37.520 --> 00:14:46.960
[Courtney] Now take a couple who’s been married for
10 years, and one spouse all of a sudden decides,
00:14:46.960 --> 00:14:53.200
you know, no, I don’t want to have sex anymore.
Is no a complete sentence anymore? Because
00:14:53.200 --> 00:14:59.520
nobody on the internet seems to think that
based on all of the conversations we’ve had.
00:14:59.520 --> 00:15:05.120
[Courtney] And what’s changed? What has changed
is that a relationship has been established and
00:15:05.120 --> 00:15:12.800
we don’t talk enough about how society imposes
different rules on that. And a lot of those rules
00:15:12.800 --> 00:15:19.920
do have legal implications, and consent at the
end of the day is also, as much as we use it like
00:15:19.920 --> 00:15:28.320
socially and as a, you know, catch-all phrase for
what healthy sexual interaction should look like,
00:15:28.320 --> 00:15:35.520
it’s also a word that is used in a court of law
to establish was there consent. Has consent been
00:15:35.520 --> 00:15:44.880
violated? And we still have organizations who
are very close to Congress, very close to the
00:15:44.880 --> 00:15:52.320
president, have a lot of money in think tanks
and politics and helping choose Supreme Court
00:15:52.320 --> 00:16:00.640
justices who are writing blogs saying things like
marriage should be conjugal, not consent-based. In
00:16:00.640 --> 00:16:08.800
a lot of places, there is no legal framework for
marital rape because in a lot of places, marriage
00:16:08.800 --> 00:16:17.920
being synonymous with sex is placed higher on the
hierarchy than individual personal autonomy is.
00:16:17.920 --> 00:16:26.480
[Courtney] These are things we really cannot
ignore. And there absolutely are situations where
00:16:26.480 --> 00:16:33.920
a certain type of person on the ace spectrum might
be completely fine with having a sexual encounter
00:16:33.920 --> 00:16:39.920
that predominantly does revolve around the other
person’s pleasure. And in the right context,
00:16:39.920 --> 00:16:48.480
that can be completely fine and wonderful in
that situation. And maybe the enthusiasticness
00:16:48.480 --> 00:16:58.400
of the consent wasn’t there, but maybe everything
else was. And within the establishment of trust,
00:16:58.400 --> 00:17:05.360
and perhaps even gaining a benefit from seeing
the enjoyment of your partner, can still make
00:17:05.360 --> 00:17:11.680
this a very positive encounter for both of
those people. There are also situations where
00:17:11.680 --> 00:17:19.520
a completely sex-averse ace does want a romantic
relationship, and they have been brought up in a
00:17:19.520 --> 00:17:26.480
society where at every turn they are told if you
have a romantic relationship, it must be sexual.
00:17:26.480 --> 00:17:31.920
[Courtney] Here is what it needs to look like. If
it’s not a sexual relationship, you either can’t
00:17:31.920 --> 00:17:37.760
have it or you’re the asshole, actually. You’re
the one who’s going to be violating the other
00:17:37.760 --> 00:17:46.640
person’s right to have a sexual relationship.
Therefore, we do have a lot of ace people who
00:17:46.640 --> 00:17:52.800
will see models like this and in their own
personal lives, in their own private minds,
00:17:52.800 --> 00:17:59.600
what they do is learn how to perform what consent
looks like despite in their heart of hearts not
00:17:59.600 --> 00:18:06.800
actually enjoying or being willing to do these
acts. And when aces like that, at the end of the
00:18:06.800 --> 00:18:15.680
day in hindsight, still feel violated, still feel
upset, still feel unhappy, but they consented on
00:18:15.680 --> 00:18:24.000
paper, they said yes, they did the performance,
they tried to fit into this allosexual framework,
00:18:24.000 --> 00:18:30.800
There can be a great loss just feeling like, I
am hurt and damaged, but who do I have to blame?
00:18:30.800 --> 00:18:35.520
[Courtney] I did what I was supposed
to do, so the other person didn’t do
00:18:35.520 --> 00:18:41.440
anything wrong. And I don’t think it’s
right, but it’s common that that ace
00:18:41.440 --> 00:18:47.680
will blame themselves. And that can turn into,
over time, if not dealt with in a healthy way,
00:18:47.680 --> 00:18:57.520
that can turn to self-loathing, that can turn
to lowered self-esteem. It’s very, very toxic.
00:18:57.520 --> 00:19:04.960
[Courtney] I have heard aces share similar
versions of these same types of encounters
00:19:04.960 --> 00:19:10.080
who in retrospect will say things like,
I’ve heard this on more than one occasion,
00:19:10.080 --> 00:19:18.400
self-assault, where it’s not a large spoken open
community conversation. It’s not like we have a
00:19:18.400 --> 00:19:25.120
big agreed-upon language for what this situation
is, but I’ve heard more than one ace person say,
00:19:25.120 --> 00:19:30.280
yeah, it felt like self-assault, it felt like I
got assaulted, but I’m the one who did this to me.
00:19:30.280 --> 00:19:38.960
[Courtney] And that is deeply insidious
because these models of consent don’t
00:19:38.960 --> 00:19:45.280
acknowledge the societal coercion. Some of
them do specifically talk about coercion.
00:19:45.280 --> 00:19:50.240
[Courtney] And the issues with it and how to
identify it, but it’s all on an individual
00:19:50.240 --> 00:19:58.880
case-to-case basis. And people can and do
get coerced by societal pressures in very
00:19:58.880 --> 00:20:05.520
much the same way that they can get coerced
by individual one-on-one pressures. And so
00:20:05.520 --> 00:20:12.880
those are two polar opposite examples for
why enthusiastic consent can fail aces. One
00:20:12.880 --> 00:20:18.080
who can still have a very positive,
healthy, happy sexual relationship,
00:20:18.080 --> 00:20:24.320
but enthusiasm doesn’t tell the whole story.
And one who is taught, this is what I need
00:20:24.320 --> 00:20:29.280
to do if I want a romantic relationship.
So I’m just going to follow the script.
00:20:29.280 --> 00:20:35.280
[Courtney] And at the end of the day, that
is not a healthy thing for that individual.
00:20:35.280 --> 00:20:40.880
So when talking about enthusiastic
consent, a lot of people will for one,
00:20:40.880 --> 00:20:46.160
a lot of people using this as a prescriptive,
this is what consent looks like model,
00:20:46.160 --> 00:20:52.960
are people for whom they have the ability
and desire to give enthusiastic consent. So
00:20:52.960 --> 00:20:58.720
they’re very often not coming from a framework
of what if someone is never going to have this
00:20:58.720 --> 00:21:04.560
type of enthusiasm? They aren’t thinking
about asexual experiences to begin with.
00:21:04.560 --> 00:21:10.800
[Royce] Yeah, without even getting into the
huge societal model and pressure of things,
00:21:10.800 --> 00:21:16.960
it does definitely weight enthusiasm to
personal enthusiasm and not the sort of,
00:21:16.960 --> 00:21:23.040
you know, vicarious positive feelings you
might feel from doing something good for
00:21:23.040 --> 00:21:29.040
another person. Like, most couples have
at least some idea of what it is like
00:21:29.040 --> 00:21:34.720
to give the other person a massage if
they’re sore or tired after work. They
00:21:34.720 --> 00:21:41.160
probably don’t feel anything particularly
positive performing the physical action.
00:21:41.160 --> 00:21:45.680
[Courtney] Man, your, your neck knots
feel so good on my fingers right now.
00:21:45.680 --> 00:21:52.320
[Royce] Yeah, yeah, I love the strain in my
hands from trying to do this for 10 minutes. Um,
00:21:52.320 --> 00:21:59.520
but doing something nice for something— someone
that you care about tends to have a positive
00:21:59.520 --> 00:22:06.160
feeling associated with it. It’s not the same as
being in the midst of arousal with someone you’re
00:22:06.160 --> 00:22:12.480
sexually attracted to getting into it. But it is a
positive thing that should qualify under a broader
00:22:12.480 --> 00:22:17.120
term of consent. But there’s also one of the
things that gets brought up in conversations like
00:22:17.120 --> 00:22:23.160
this is couples who are trying to conceive, where
they’re having some sort of fertility issues.
00:22:23.160 --> 00:22:29.360
[Royce] And now they’ve gone to a doctor and
they’re on a schedule. And the timer goes off
00:22:29.360 --> 00:22:32.240
or the, you know, they get a notification
on their phone. And they’re like, oh,
00:22:32.240 --> 00:22:35.760
it’s time. I’m tired. You’re tired. We
know this. We’re both sore. We just have
00:22:35.760 --> 00:22:39.920
to get it over with. Yeah, we’re on the
clock. Let’s, let’s just get this done.
00:22:39.920 --> 00:22:46.640
[Courtney] And nobody is going to tell them you
did sex wrong. They just had a different goal than
00:22:46.640 --> 00:22:52.880
personal pleasure. Because that’s another thing
too. Personal pleasure is very much underlining
00:22:52.880 --> 00:22:59.680
a lot of these conversations. And that’s where the
enthusiastic framework, I think, often comes from.
00:22:59.680 --> 00:23:05.280
[Courtney] But to your point about
You know, doing something because
00:23:05.280 --> 00:23:10.960
you do get vicarious enjoyment from your
partner’s pleasure. That’s the thing that,
00:23:10.960 --> 00:23:14.160
I mean, even some allosexuals can relate to that.
00:23:14.160 --> 00:23:19.600
[Royce] There’s something, I guess,
not explicitly spoken about the word
00:23:19.600 --> 00:23:26.560
enthusiastic in terms of consent that makes
me feel that most people interpret it to be
00:23:26.560 --> 00:23:34.800
paired and equal. And there are a lot of
cases where an individual sexual session,
00:23:34.800 --> 00:23:40.376
the focus may not be equal on both
people’s pleasure at the same time.
00:23:40.376 --> 00:23:40.393
[Courtney] Mm-hmm.
00:23:40.393 --> 00:23:44.480
[Royce] It may be depending on—
particularly if you’re getting into,
00:23:44.480 --> 00:23:49.920
you know, really anything in the kink realm,
there may be one person who is doing something
00:23:49.920 --> 00:23:54.400
more on the other’s behalf. And then maybe you
switch at a different session. It’s not always,
00:23:54.400 --> 00:23:56.480
you know, one and the same or paired in that way.
00:23:56.480 --> 00:24:04.720
[Courtney] And the thing about that is, like, when
I say the rules are different for relationships
00:24:04.720 --> 00:24:11.280
in different ways, that is for, like, long-term
romantic relationships, like people who do get
00:24:11.280 --> 00:24:17.040
married and just have potentially even monogamous
sex the rest of their life, but also for, like,
00:24:17.040 --> 00:24:22.800
ongoing sexual relationships that might not
be romantic when people— When people have,
00:24:22.800 --> 00:24:32.000
like, pre-established kink partners. And they
will have sessions repeatedly over a lengthy
00:24:32.000 --> 00:24:39.040
period of time or ongoing, there is going to
be feedback and conversation and adjusting. But
00:24:39.040 --> 00:24:44.880
in those kind of situations, there might
even be experimentation where, you know,
00:24:44.880 --> 00:24:49.040
maybe it gets to a point where someone
isn’t super enthusiastic about something,
00:24:49.040 --> 00:24:52.000
maybe they don’t even know if
they’re gonna like something,
00:24:52.000 --> 00:24:57.760
but maybe it is still mutually and willingly
agreed upon that like, yeah, let’s try this.
00:24:57.760 --> 00:25:02.720
[Courtney] And see how it works. And
of course, in those situations, yes,
00:25:02.720 --> 00:25:06.480
it should be revocable. If you get
into it and decide, oh, no, no, no,
00:25:06.480 --> 00:25:11.360
this actually isn’t for me. Yes, that needs to be
able to be communicated and stopped immediately.
00:25:11.360 --> 00:25:16.640
[Royce] That’s, that’s what safe words
are for. A lot of kink or otherwise
00:25:16.640 --> 00:25:21.520
explorations are about finding your lines
and stepping as close to them as you can.
00:25:21.520 --> 00:25:26.480
[Courtney] And even, even think about
like the most vanilla straight cis,
00:25:26.480 --> 00:25:31.360
like monogamous married couple long term you
can think of, what is the number one advice for
00:25:31.360 --> 00:25:39.160
saving their marriage if they’re a little on the
rocks. Like, well, time to spice up the bedroom.
00:25:39.160 --> 00:25:42.400
[Royce] Time to add a third
position to your rotation.
00:25:42.400 --> 00:25:47.520
[Courtney] Time to— right? Like,
even though I think those bits of
00:25:47.520 --> 00:25:53.440
advice are extremely reductive, and I
completely reject the entire framework
00:25:53.440 --> 00:25:59.280
of sex is going to inherently save
your marriage, even for allosexuals.
00:25:59.280 --> 00:26:06.400
That is the, shall we say, conventional
wisdom, like spice up the bedroom.
00:26:06.400 --> 00:26:14.240
[Courtney] And yeah, sometimes finding those
boundaries, there might be situations on an
00:26:14.240 --> 00:26:18.640
individual level where it’s like, yeah,
I don’t know that this is a thing I want,
00:26:18.640 --> 00:26:26.000
but I am willing to try for you. But
let’s talk about the word willing,
00:26:26.000 --> 00:26:30.320
because there are also situations where
something can look very similar, like, oh,
00:26:30.320 --> 00:26:33.520
I really want to try this, I really want to try
it. Maybe you’re even hounding someone for years.
00:26:33.520 --> 00:26:36.160
[Courtney] I really want to try this.
No, no, no, I really want to try it. No.
00:26:36.160 --> 00:26:39.520
[Courtney] And you keep asking, you keep
hounding, and eventually you have worn
00:26:39.520 --> 00:26:45.040
that person down and they’re like, okay,
all right, fine. That’s a bad version of
00:26:45.040 --> 00:26:52.160
arguably a very similar situation. So how
do you actually delineate the difference
00:26:52.160 --> 00:27:01.360
between what is an acceptable and healthy
attempt to see what happens, to explore,
00:27:01.360 --> 00:27:08.320
to find the boundary versus someone just got
worn down and coerced in a very unhealthy way.
00:27:08.320 --> 00:27:15.600
[Courtney] I think the keyword is willing. And
there actually is a framework out there that I
00:27:15.600 --> 00:27:22.400
think, again, not perfect, But I do think more
people in the ace community need to know about
00:27:22.400 --> 00:27:29.840
it because I think it’s a lot more applicable
to a wider variety of our experiences than the
00:27:29.840 --> 00:27:38.160
FRIES model or other similar enthusiastic
consent conversations. And this framework
00:27:38.160 --> 00:27:45.120
was created by Emily Nagoski, who—
I have seen some of Emily’s work,
00:27:45.120 --> 00:27:50.320
some of it I think is better than others from
an ace perspective, I don’t think everything
00:27:50.320 --> 00:27:56.160
Emily’s ever said has been perfectly
considerate of the ace community, but oh,
00:27:56.160 --> 00:28:02.000
you better believe every other sex researcher
I have come across has probably been much,
00:28:02.000 --> 00:28:11.200
much worse. But in this framework, you take
the idea of consent and you don’t say, like
00:28:11.200 --> 00:28:17.800
many of the other models do, that this is the only
true consent, this is the one way consent looks.
00:28:17.800 --> 00:28:25.360
[Courtney] And instead it gets categorized into
four different types of consent. One of which
00:28:25.360 --> 00:28:32.080
is enthusiastic consent. ’Cause of course that
does exist for some people, many people in fact,
00:28:32.080 --> 00:28:40.560
where it is something you want to do. But right
alongside enthusiastic consent is willing consent.
00:28:40.560 --> 00:28:47.520
And what willing consent might look like is...
You know, I’m pretty sure this will be okay.
00:28:47.520 --> 00:28:53.440
I don’t think there will be any negative
ramifications if I say yes. I don’t think
00:28:53.440 --> 00:29:00.080
I’m going to regret this. I think I might get
some sort of enjoyment vicariously through what
00:29:00.080 --> 00:29:07.360
this is doing for you. Maybe I’m not feeling it
right now, but maybe I will once we get into it.
00:29:07.360 --> 00:29:13.480
[Courtney] Like, this is a willing consent. You
are willing to do this and you are saying yes.
00:29:13.480 --> 00:29:18.000
[Courtney] It doesn’t necessarily mean it’s
enthusiastic. It doesn’t necessarily mean
00:29:18.000 --> 00:29:24.560
both people in this situation are going to be
at like inherently equal amounts of pleasure
00:29:24.560 --> 00:29:30.640
with this particular act or this particular
session. But along with willing consent comes
00:29:30.640 --> 00:29:38.960
unwilling consent. And that is the phrase
that I think so many aces who have tried
00:29:38.960 --> 00:29:45.120
to fit into allosexual norms, thinking this
is what a relationship needs to look like,
00:29:45.120 --> 00:29:50.160
this is how I have to perform, I have to
do this for my partner. But not only do
00:29:50.160 --> 00:29:54.080
I have to do this for my partner, I have
to make my partner think that I really,
00:29:54.080 --> 00:30:03.520
really want to do this actually. Unwilling
consent can be given even if this person’s
00:30:03.520 --> 00:30:09.360
partner is not doing something wrong. It of course
can happen if they’re doing something wrong, but
00:30:09.360 --> 00:30:14.480
I’m gonna put a pin in that and save that because
that’s what our 4th category kind of covers.
00:30:14.480 --> 00:30:20.080
[Courtney] So unwilling consent to
me and to my perspective of many
00:30:20.080 --> 00:30:25.920
ace experiences that are so hard
to talk about is that, you know,
00:30:25.920 --> 00:30:30.000
consent on paper, you know, on paper, I
said yes, I did what I was supposed to
00:30:30.000 --> 00:30:34.680
do. I even forced myself to put on a smile
because that’s what you’re supposed to do.
00:30:34.680 --> 00:30:40.320
[Courtney] But I didn’t like it. I didn’t
want it. Maybe I regret it after the fact.
00:30:40.320 --> 00:30:45.840
[Courtney] This is where you
are letting societal norms,
00:30:45.840 --> 00:30:53.200
societal pressure guide what you’re doing in
interpersonal situations. And it happens all
00:30:53.200 --> 00:31:01.280
too often. And I haven’t found many other consent
models that actually account for that situation.
00:31:01.280 --> 00:31:09.520
Unwilling consent might be given if someone
fears the consequences of saying no more than
00:31:09.520 --> 00:31:17.360
the consequences of allowing their own internal
boundaries to be broken and unspoken often. And
00:31:17.360 --> 00:31:24.400
that can look like, you know, people pleasing
tendencies, like, I don’t want to do this, but I,
00:31:24.400 --> 00:31:30.080
you know, haven’t developed confident,
healthy ways to say no to people.
00:31:30.080 --> 00:31:36.080
[Royce] That can also happen in a relationship
where there’s any amount of ongoing conflict
00:31:36.080 --> 00:31:42.480
around this topic where sort of doing the
mental math of which is going to hurt worse,
00:31:42.480 --> 00:31:44.600
going through with it or having the argument.
00:31:44.600 --> 00:31:54.720
[Courtney] Yeah, or, or in not individual basis,
but just think about a romantic ace person who
00:31:54.720 --> 00:31:59.920
just does want a romantic relationship,
but has been told it has to be sexual,
00:31:59.920 --> 00:32:05.600
or else you don’t get to have this thing that you
want. That might be a much bigger question than
00:32:05.600 --> 00:32:13.680
this individual one-on-one situation. It might be,
if I want a romantic relationship, period, I must
00:32:13.680 --> 00:32:18.840
have sex with these people or this person or the
person I want to be my long-term romantic partner.
00:32:18.840 --> 00:32:27.760
[Courtney] So that is still technically,
legally, verbally giving consent. But inside,
00:32:27.760 --> 00:32:34.560
that person is not willing. And that
is what people need to understand.
00:32:34.560 --> 00:32:41.200
[Courtney] It’s also something that for people who
have a history of experiencing sexual assault,
00:32:41.200 --> 00:32:48.480
sometimes that can just become almost a safety
measure where it almost feels safer to give
00:32:48.480 --> 00:32:58.240
consent on paper, even if you don’t want to, than
it is to say no, because maybe you have seen how
00:32:58.240 --> 00:33:06.800
deeply unsafe or violent things can turn when
consent is actually withheld. And I like that
00:33:06.800 --> 00:33:13.520
the fourth and final one is considered coerced
consent under this model, because that makes
00:33:13.520 --> 00:33:18.400
space for the fact that if this is coerced
consent, this is on an individual basis.
00:33:18.400 --> 00:33:26.240
[Courtney] The other person has threatened
you or given you an ultimatum, or they have
00:33:26.240 --> 00:33:35.280
said or done something to actively insinuate that
they may become unsafe and violent if you do not
00:33:35.280 --> 00:33:44.720
say no. This is the person is directly making
you feel unsafe, and so you say yes. That is
00:33:44.720 --> 00:33:50.800
different from unwilling consent. Coerced consent,
unwilling. And then on the other side of things,
00:33:50.800 --> 00:33:57.040
you have willing consent and enthusiastic consent.
So in this model, there are two situations that
00:33:57.040 --> 00:34:02.160
can be very positive and healthy for everyone
involved, and they are different things.
00:34:02.160 --> 00:34:07.840
[Courtney] Enthusiastic consent, yes, can be
wonderful. Willing consent can also be wonderful,
00:34:07.840 --> 00:34:13.440
but that’s the one where everyone who
has enthusiastic consent just beaten into
00:34:13.440 --> 00:34:18.960
their brains through discourse over the years,
through feminist theory, through sex education,
00:34:18.960 --> 00:34:25.520
Through sex positivity, it is really hard
to break away from that concept of consent
00:34:25.520 --> 00:34:31.600
must be enthusiastic or it’s not consent.
But this idea of willing consent, I think,
00:34:31.600 --> 00:34:39.680
needs to be added to more people’s framework.
Because then on the other side of things,
00:34:39.680 --> 00:34:43.920
unwilling consent and coerced
consent, both very unhealthy.
00:34:43.920 --> 00:34:48.720
[Courtney] But also look very
different from each other.
00:34:48.720 --> 00:34:57.200
Now I will say, it— all of these have their
own individual nuances. And this again is a
00:34:57.200 --> 00:35:05.120
framework for me and my body and my choice and
my underlying thoughts and feelings about this.
00:35:05.120 --> 00:35:12.000
[Courtney] Therefore, as incredibly helpful
as I think this can be for more people to
00:35:12.000 --> 00:35:17.520
learn about and internalize, and especially
the ace community, I think there’s often an
00:35:17.520 --> 00:35:25.920
anxiety that by nature of there being a concept of
willing consent that is agreed upon as something
00:35:25.920 --> 00:35:32.240
that isn’t inherently wrong or unhealthy in
every situation, that that can open the door
00:35:32.240 --> 00:35:39.040
to more coerced consent. Because, you know, oh,
if someone learns, well, yeah, some people have
00:35:39.040 --> 00:35:45.520
sex just because their partner really likes it, or
some people might do this because they should just
00:35:45.520 --> 00:35:52.240
be happy that their partner’s happy, then I think
the concern is often, well, now someone’s going to
00:35:52.240 --> 00:35:57.760
use that as like, well, if some people do this
despite not being enthusiastic, why can’t you?
00:35:57.760 --> 00:36:05.760
[Courtney] And use that as another tool to coerce
others. But I quite frankly think coerced consent
00:36:05.760 --> 00:36:14.000
happens so often that I like, I don’t think more
education on this is going to lead to more of it
00:36:14.000 --> 00:36:20.320
because I think that’s already one of the tools
for coercive people to use that’s out there.
00:36:20.320 --> 00:36:28.080
[Courtney] And that’s already what, on a societal
level, people do and say when the context of a
00:36:28.080 --> 00:36:34.000
relationship is added. Like, well, you married
this person, this is your long-term relationship,
00:36:34.000 --> 00:36:38.200
you have to do this for them, you
have to keep that person happy.
00:36:38.200 --> 00:36:42.160
[Courtney] And so that’s, that’s the
power of naming it, naming the fact
00:36:42.160 --> 00:36:48.400
that willing consent exists. And unwilling
consent exists. We need to name it and be
00:36:48.400 --> 00:36:52.800
aware that those exist. And it very well
may be that someone will come out with an
00:36:52.800 --> 00:36:58.040
even better model that will not use this
language but still use these concepts.
00:36:58.040 --> 00:37:01.760
[Courtney] And that is fine. And we
should allow this conversation to
00:37:01.760 --> 00:37:08.000
adapt as needed. But what we don’t
need is for things to go so hard in
00:37:08.000 --> 00:37:13.440
one direction that it loses all nuance for
the people for whom it does not. work for.
00:37:13.440 --> 00:37:20.240
[Courtney] I think just by nature of naming that
willing consent exists makes it— should make it
00:37:20.240 --> 00:37:26.640
even easier to identify when there is a hardline
difference between willing consent and coerced
00:37:26.640 --> 00:37:33.200
consent, because those are two distinct things.
Because there are also a couple of concepts that
00:37:33.200 --> 00:37:41.520
I often also find are completely left out
of consent models, but are nevertheless
00:37:41.520 --> 00:37:53.160
very important. And that is, quite frankly,
trust and respect. Do you trust your partner?
00:37:53.160 --> 00:37:57.120
[Courtney] Because going back to
the FRIES model, for example,
00:37:57.120 --> 00:38:02.720
the Planned Parenthood as one example
of what is and is not informed consent,
00:38:02.720 --> 00:38:07.280
you can only consent to something if you
have the full story. For example, If someone
00:38:07.280 --> 00:38:13.440
says they’ll use a condom and then they don’t,
that is not full consent. That’s good to know.
00:38:13.440 --> 00:38:20.960
[Courtney] However, before this encounter even
begins, do you trust that your partner gave you
00:38:20.960 --> 00:38:26.240
full information? Do you trust that they
won’t pull the rug out from under you? Do
00:38:26.240 --> 00:38:31.920
you trust that if you say no or ask to stop
in the moment that they will actually stop?
00:38:31.920 --> 00:38:37.200
[Royce] Trust is a good thing to bring
up because clearly a physical object,
00:38:37.200 --> 00:38:42.080
a condom, was mentioned, but a
part of any discussion with a
00:38:42.080 --> 00:38:48.240
new partner should be health and
potential STIs and testing. And—
00:38:48.240 --> 00:38:49.560
[Courtney] Do you trust them?
00:38:49.560 --> 00:38:52.320
[Royce] Do you trust them? Are you
going to ask for the paperwork?
00:38:52.320 --> 00:39:00.720
[Courtney] Yeah, and trust does start looking
different over time. When a relationship is
00:39:00.720 --> 00:39:07.840
established, because obviously for a one-night
stand situation, you are not going to have as much
00:39:07.840 --> 00:39:16.000
information with which to determine whether or not
you trust this person as a long-term relationship
00:39:16.000 --> 00:39:22.560
has. And I’m in this situation using relationship
to mean potentially it is a married couple,
00:39:22.560 --> 00:39:27.200
potentially it is like long-term kink partners.
I don’t care if it’s just sexual or if it’s
00:39:27.200 --> 00:39:31.840
sexual and romantic, if you have a long-term
established relationship with that person,
00:39:31.840 --> 00:39:35.040
you have a lot more information,
you’ve had a lot more feedback,
00:39:35.040 --> 00:39:40.080
you’ve seen how they react in different
situations. And with that information in mind,
00:39:40.080 --> 00:39:45.920
hopefully it’s a very healthy, positive
relationship and the trust has grown.
00:39:45.920 --> 00:39:52.400
Hopefully your trust hasn’t been broken and
now you are actively suspicious of this person.
00:39:52.400 --> 00:39:59.040
[Courtney] But Trust does get built
upon. So I do think that in addition
00:39:59.040 --> 00:40:08.240
to understanding the willing and
unwilling categories of consent,
00:40:08.240 --> 00:40:13.440
I really think there should be more
inherent conversations about trust.
00:40:13.440 --> 00:40:17.760
[Courtney] Because it is gonna look different for
other people. Everyone’s gonna have a different
00:40:17.760 --> 00:40:24.240
sort of risk tolerance. People are going to have
different thresholds for what they want to see
00:40:24.240 --> 00:40:30.720
before they start to trust someone. And I don’t
think it should ever be held against someone if
00:40:30.720 --> 00:40:37.600
they need a little more time before they begin
engaging in sexual activity because they haven’t
00:40:37.600 --> 00:40:46.400
yet established that trust they need in order to
have the type of sexual encounter that they want.
00:40:46.400 --> 00:40:52.480
And maybe this is just a personal gripe
and not a big societal-wide commentary,
00:40:52.480 --> 00:40:58.960
but it does a little bit— it has started
driving me up the wall just a little bit
00:40:58.960 --> 00:41:06.160
with how often I hear people pull
out the like, consent is sexy.
00:41:06.160 --> 00:41:13.840
[Courtney] This fully just might be a personal
gripe, but you start to see like, in commentary,
00:41:13.840 --> 00:41:19.040
and usually it’s commentary in reaction
to, for example, like voice memo guy,
00:41:19.040 --> 00:41:25.280
we talked about that last week. When, when
there’s a very clear example of someone not,
00:41:25.280 --> 00:41:32.080
quote, practicing good consent, there will often
be at least some portion of, more often than not,
00:41:32.080 --> 00:41:39.120
women who start to say like, don’t they know
consent is sexy? Like, I didn’t— necessarily
00:41:39.120 --> 00:41:45.200
want to have sex with this person until he
started talking about my boundaries, and now
00:41:45.200 --> 00:41:50.000
I’m all hot and bothered because consent is so
sexy and he understands that. And the thing is,
00:41:50.000 --> 00:41:55.280
the thing is, the thing is, I don’t even
think that most of those people believe
00:41:55.280 --> 00:42:03.440
that consent is sexy. I think it just comes
down to trust, and I think certain elements
00:42:03.440 --> 00:42:10.720
of practicing consent or demonstrating that
you understand at least a basic framework of
00:42:10.720 --> 00:42:15.520
consent, I think helps move the needle in a
direction of maybe I can trust this person.
00:42:15.520 --> 00:42:20.520
[Courtney] So I think it’s more
trust than the actual word consent.
00:42:20.520 --> 00:42:27.840
[Royce] I feel like the whole consent is sexy
thing came from a backlash to an earlier
00:42:27.840 --> 00:42:34.800
attempt to have discussions of consent more
frequently. Where the idea of someone asking,
00:42:34.800 --> 00:42:40.800
hey, can I do this, in the middle of
both parties being all hot and bothered,
00:42:40.800 --> 00:42:45.320
people were like, oh, you’re
ruining the mood, just go for it.
00:42:45.320 --> 00:42:51.200
[Courtney] Uh, it’s because I don’t
think consent is, um, even capable
00:42:51.200 --> 00:42:57.920
of being sexy. I think as a concept, I
don’t know, I— grain of salt everything,
00:42:57.920 --> 00:43:05.080
nothing is sexy. Nothing is sexy. Sexiness
does not exist in my head or in my world.
00:43:05.080 --> 00:43:11.840
[Courtney] But from what I know about consent,
and with the framework I’m working with, where,
00:43:11.840 --> 00:43:16.640
yeah, enthusiastic consent works for some
people, for some people willing consent is
00:43:16.640 --> 00:43:21.760
the closest you’re gonna get to that. Then
you have unwilling consent, which is very
00:43:21.760 --> 00:43:26.400
much not a good thing. Then you have coerced
consent, which is very much not a good thing.
00:43:26.400 --> 00:43:32.960
I guess I am thinking about it more from
like a transactional standpoint. Like,
00:43:32.960 --> 00:43:38.080
you said yes, you said or did
a thing, that means proceed.
00:43:38.080 --> 00:43:43.040
[Courtney] Totally devoid of what the
context is. And to me, the context is
00:43:43.040 --> 00:43:50.120
everything that matters. So do I think that
context can be sexy for some people? Yes.
00:43:50.120 --> 00:43:57.040
[Courtney] In most cases, when I hear consent
is sexy, I think it’s just the other party
00:43:57.040 --> 00:44:07.760
said or did something that is fostering your
trust in them. So maybe trust is sexy. Allos,
00:44:07.760 --> 00:44:13.200
please advise, is trust sexy? Is that
a thing I can say with my whole chest?
00:44:13.200 --> 00:44:18.480
[Courtney] So even knowing full well that
people have different thresholds for trust,
00:44:18.480 --> 00:44:26.480
I think trust should be more of a conversation.
When it comes to these discussions. What I think
00:44:26.480 --> 00:44:34.840
we’re gonna talk about more next week is the
other side of that coin, which is respect.
00:44:34.840 --> 00:44:42.720
[Courtney] Because I do often fear that some
of the vehemently sex-positive discourse
00:44:42.720 --> 00:44:49.440
has gotten so far in the direction of— I
was gonna say individuality, but I almost
00:44:49.440 --> 00:44:56.800
wanna say selfishness. Like only thinking about
yourself and only thinking about your own needs,
00:44:56.800 --> 00:45:05.680
that I think it has led to excusing a lot of bad
behavior from people who have not demonstrated
00:45:05.680 --> 00:45:12.320
that they actually respect the person they’re
engaging in a sexual relationship with. Because
00:45:12.320 --> 00:45:19.360
even in situations of casual sex where
neither party wants this or intends this
00:45:19.360 --> 00:45:23.360
to become a romantic relationship and
they are on the same page with that,
00:45:23.360 --> 00:45:28.960
they both still need to have a basic amount of
respect for one another. And utterly missing
00:45:28.960 --> 00:45:36.720
from the conversation of informed consent and
expressing boundaries and talking about needs
00:45:36.720 --> 00:45:45.280
and wants, I think it has gotten so individually
minded that we do start excusing bad behavior.
00:45:45.280 --> 00:45:52.240
[Courtney] We do. So we need more discussions
about not only what, quote, consent looks like,
00:45:52.240 --> 00:46:00.800
but what trust and respect look like in
these situations. And I also want to caution,
00:46:00.800 --> 00:46:05.840
and here’s where like prescriptive consent
conversations do start to bother me,
00:46:05.840 --> 00:46:08.800
where it’s like, this is what
it needs to look like, X, Y,
00:46:08.800 --> 00:46:15.920
and Z. And if these situations are— if you observe
this from your partner, then full steam ahead,
00:46:15.920 --> 00:46:23.200
everything’s good to go. And even the consent
is sexy discussions? I sometimes worry that
00:46:23.200 --> 00:46:32.880
we are using the framework of consent to just
become a new way to conceptualize transactional
00:46:32.880 --> 00:46:40.960
sexual relationships. Because mind you, this is
during a time where we do have manosphere and
00:46:40.960 --> 00:46:48.320
adjacent commenters out here who are saying—
Full well, usually the incredibly reductive,
00:46:48.320 --> 00:46:55.760
like, men want sex, it is what they want, women
are the gatekeepers of sex, and so everything a
00:46:55.760 --> 00:47:02.320
man does in the dating or courting process is to
obtain sex, so he needs to spend time with her,
00:47:02.320 --> 00:47:08.160
he needs to listen to her stories, maybe he
needs to buy her dinner, and all of these is
00:47:08.160 --> 00:47:17.080
the cost of sex, and it’s talked about in a very—
monetary and time-cost and transactional way.
00:47:17.080 --> 00:47:24.800
[Courtney] They are spending money and time
in order to obtain sex. And for so often,
00:47:24.800 --> 00:47:29.360
like, for people who— the shockingly high
number of people who are going to listen
00:47:29.360 --> 00:47:34.560
to commenters like that are going to say, okay,
if I want this, I just have to do that. And they
00:47:34.560 --> 00:47:40.480
are very selfishly looking out for their own
interests and not fundamentally respecting or
00:47:40.480 --> 00:47:46.400
looking out for the other person’s interest. And
I do worry that when too many people out there
00:47:46.400 --> 00:47:53.840
start saying consent is sexy, consent is sexy,
that some people who haven’t fully developed
00:47:53.840 --> 00:47:59.120
their practice of respect— I’m gonna call it
a practice of respect instead of a practice of
00:47:59.120 --> 00:48:06.320
consent— For people who haven’t fully developed
their practice of respect, for another person,
00:48:06.320 --> 00:48:12.560
I think they’re going to see it as like, oh,
this is what I have to do in order to obtain sex.
00:48:12.560 --> 00:48:19.760
[Courtney] And that just continues a new way
of following a script to get what you want.
00:48:19.760 --> 00:48:28.240
Maybe that’s a little overly cynical of me, but
I’m thinking of— let’s go old school, let’s go
00:48:28.240 --> 00:48:35.920
to Immanuel Kant, where he would talk about,
you know, rewarding a child for good behavior.
00:48:35.920 --> 00:48:41.920
[Courtney] Teaches them to act for personal
gain. That’s the, like, moral deserts. Like,
00:48:41.920 --> 00:48:47.040
you only do good things for other people
because you think you’re going to get
00:48:47.040 --> 00:48:53.040
rewarded for it. Immanuel Kant would
order, that’s not having, you know,
00:48:53.040 --> 00:49:00.880
inherent morality. That’s not practicing
good ethics if it is all selfish in the end.
00:49:00.880 --> 00:49:06.240
[Courtney] And I’ve even heard anecdotally, and I
don’t know how many of these are real scenarios
00:49:06.240 --> 00:49:12.560
that actually happen, Or if it’s just the way
people talk online. At this point in my life,
00:49:12.560 --> 00:49:16.120
I talk to a lot more aces than
I do allos on a regular basis.
00:49:16.120 --> 00:49:25.520
[Courtney] But I’ve seen for years social media
posts of women saying like, oh, I wasn’t going
00:49:25.520 --> 00:49:34.080
to have sex with this man, I wasn’t prepared for
this, I didn’t want this yet, but as soon as he
00:49:34.080 --> 00:49:41.760
you know, asked me for my consent, or as soon as
he expressed that he understood what consent was,
00:49:41.760 --> 00:49:51.040
then I was turned on and I was horny and we went
for it because consent is sexy. And yeah, do,
00:49:51.040 --> 00:49:58.000
do I actually think there are people out there
who haven’t developed their respect practice yet
00:49:58.000 --> 00:50:04.400
who are gonna see that and be like, I see, So
that is a shortcut to getting the thing that is
00:50:04.400 --> 00:50:11.200
solely within my own self-interest and is to have
sex with this person. Yeah, I do. I really do.
00:50:11.200 --> 00:50:16.160
[Courtney] So we’re gonna follow that train
of thought more next week because I want
00:50:16.160 --> 00:50:21.600
to circle back to a topic we’ve already
touched on but is extremely relevant now,
00:50:21.600 --> 00:50:27.520
and that is the right to sex.
Do people have a right to sex?
00:50:27.520 --> 00:50:34.720
[Courtney] And “my needs.” Like, you know, “a man
has needs.” I have needs. You hear that all the
00:50:34.720 --> 00:50:47.120
time. Needs and rights. And do I actually think
that we can develop proper respect practices under
00:50:47.120 --> 00:50:55.897
the framework of willing and unwilling consent
if we still believe or we still talk about—
00:50:55.897 --> 00:50:55.910
[Royce] Needs.
00:50:55.910 --> 00:51:01.600
[Courtney] Sex being a fundamental human
need or people having a right to have sex,
00:51:01.600 --> 00:51:03.920
or maybe you don’t inherently have a right to sex,
00:51:03.920 --> 00:51:09.520
but maybe you have a right to sex if you’re
in a relationship. We need to talk about
00:51:09.520 --> 00:51:17.280
that. There is a very real conversation about
individual one-on-one interpersonal situations,
00:51:17.280 --> 00:51:22.920
about what a healthy type of consent looks like
when you get to that situation in the moment.
00:51:22.920 --> 00:51:32.640
[Courtney] But as we’ve seen, it is a much broader
issue than that. And I don’t foresee this concept
00:51:32.640 --> 00:51:41.120
of unwilling consent becoming less common
unless we can actually identify the problems
00:51:41.120 --> 00:51:48.400
in how society views these things. And yes,
people do talk about sex as a need, not a want.
00:51:48.400 --> 00:51:56.400
[Courtney] A basic human right, not something
that you can gain access to with a proper
00:51:56.400 --> 00:52:03.440
respect practice and trust you have gained
from other people. And those are the things
00:52:03.440 --> 00:52:11.120
that far too often get removed from the
conversations of consent on the whole. So
00:52:11.120 --> 00:52:16.720
please tune in next week for our 4th and
final installment of our Consent Month
00:52:16.720 --> 00:52:22.000
series. It will be the end of the month as
we are diving into this topic, but it will
00:52:22.000 --> 00:52:28.680
not be the end of the conversation, period.
Because as we all know, consent is ongoing.
00:52:28.680 --> 00:52:33.360
[Courtney] But as for today, I am going
to leave you all off as usual with our
00:52:33.360 --> 00:52:39.840
featured Marketplace vendor of the week,
LauravianArt. LauravianArt is a freelance
00:52:39.840 --> 00:52:44.480
illustrator from the Netherlands
creating original linocut prints,
00:52:44.480 --> 00:52:48.960
prints, stickers, keychains, and more,
often with a queer theme to them.
00:52:48.960 --> 00:52:54.240
[Courtney] And there are lots of very, very
fun things here. I know how many of you in
00:52:54.240 --> 00:53:01.400
the audience are massive fans of Project
Hail Mary, and as of recently, we are too.
00:53:01.400 --> 00:53:06.800
[Courtney] You can find some very, very
good stickers here. I was so tempted to
00:53:06.800 --> 00:53:10.160
get this sticker myself when I saw it
pop up in the shop, and I still might,
00:53:10.160 --> 00:53:16.560
to be honest. But there’s an adorable
little piece of art here with Grace
00:53:16.560 --> 00:53:21.320
hugging Rocky’s little, like, ball,
and it says, Grace Rocky saves stars.
00:53:21.320 --> 00:53:26.320
[Courtney] I know we also have a lot of Our
Flag Means Death fans in the audience. It’s
00:53:26.320 --> 00:53:30.800
been a while since we’ve talked about that one,
but there is some really good Our Flag Means
00:53:30.800 --> 00:53:36.560
Death art. Also Life is Strange. We’ve talked
about Life is Strange a number of times here,
00:53:36.560 --> 00:53:45.440
but there’s a very good Max and Chloe print, and
it’s even got Sean and Daniel on the flip side.
00:53:45.440 --> 00:53:54.120
Or you can do what I did and purchase a PDF
sewing pattern for a medieval jester collar.
00:53:54.120 --> 00:53:59.600
[Courtney] This thing looks so cool,
and I’m very excited to try it out.
00:53:59.600 --> 00:54:06.000
Um, all the photos in the reviews of
other people who have made their own
00:54:06.000 --> 00:54:12.400
jester collar based on these patterns are
absolutely phenomenal. I love it so much.
00:54:12.400 --> 00:54:19.120
[Courtney] Perfect for any ren faire goers
or people who just like sewing silly little
00:54:19.120 --> 00:54:28.000
costumes. So obviously enormous variety of
things on this shop. So please do check out
00:54:28.000 --> 00:54:33.280
our vendor LauravianArt. Links as always are
going to be in the show notes on our website
00:54:33.280 --> 00:54:39.680
as well as the description box. If you are
listening to us on YouTube. So as always,
00:54:39.680 --> 00:54:43.520
thank you all so much for being here,
and we will talk to you all next time.
Kind: captions
Language: en-US
00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:03.760
[Courtney] Hello everyone and
welcome back. My name is Courtney,
00:00:03.760 --> 00:00:08.720
I’m here with my spouse Royce. Together
we are The Ace Couple, and at long last,
00:00:08.720 --> 00:00:15.190
as oft-promised, I am finally going
to at least start the conversation.
00:00:15.190 --> 00:00:20.400
[Courtney] I’m sure we will not reach every
corner that could or should be explored. Again,
00:00:20.400 --> 00:00:24.800
we are completely unscripted, we are
just talking about our own thoughts.
00:00:24.800 --> 00:00:32.600
Please don’t take any of this as the end-all
be-all final say. Covered everything 100%.
00:00:32.600 --> 00:00:41.280
[Courtney] It is time to talk about consent. And as
it is Consent Month, we have started approaching
00:00:41.280 --> 00:00:47.840
this conversation in our last two episodes.
So more precisely, we are talking about the
00:00:47.840 --> 00:00:59.840
concept of enthusiastic consent and how I do not
think that is the most appropriate model for most
00:00:59.840 --> 00:01:10.000
asexual experiences. Now socially, in life, in
the internet, in discourse, enthusiastic consent
00:01:10.000 --> 00:01:18.000
is a phrase that I personally believe gets thrown
around so frequently that it’s almost become more
00:01:18.000 --> 00:01:29.360
of a buzzword than a tangible concept. But because
it is often propped up by sex-positive people,
00:01:29.360 --> 00:01:37.840
feminists, sex educators as being sort of the
pinnacle of what consent is and should look like,
00:01:37.840 --> 00:01:45.120
it should always be enthusiastic, I often find
that criticisms of enthusiastic consent, in
00:01:45.120 --> 00:01:52.120
that word, in that phrase, comes with a knee-jerk
reaction of, oh, so you don’t want proper consent.
00:01:52.120 --> 00:01:57.840
[Courtney] So I’m gonna ask any of you who have
that impression of enthusiastic consent as being
00:01:57.840 --> 00:02:03.440
the pinnacle, the end-all, ideal of what consent
is and should look like. I’m gonna ask you to
00:02:03.440 --> 00:02:10.880
bear with me as we talk through this because
I actually think I have deeper, more nuanced
00:02:10.880 --> 00:02:20.480
standards for what consent— how consent should be
talked about and educated. So I am in no way ever
00:02:20.480 --> 00:02:27.280
going to say we should have lower standards for
consent, but I do think— You know the old saying,
00:02:27.280 --> 00:02:34.320
all models are wrong, but some are useful?
I think that very much applies here. I think
00:02:34.320 --> 00:02:39.680
there are some people who are very new to
learning about the concept of consent where
00:02:39.680 --> 00:02:46.560
the idea of enthusiastic consent is perhaps an
aspirational goal or an easy one to latch onto.
00:02:46.560 --> 00:02:52.560
[Courtney] So I’m not even saying that that
phrase is always wrong or bad. But when we
00:02:52.560 --> 00:03:00.600
talk about it as the only way consent can be,
I think we do a lot of people a disservice.
00:03:00.600 --> 00:03:09.840
[Royce] Yeah, I think the word enthusiastic
is a very strong word that doesn’t encompass
00:03:09.840 --> 00:03:16.480
all of the ways that people actually tend to
interact, and because of that, some very real,
00:03:16.480 --> 00:03:23.040
not uncommon situations end up falling into
a gray area if you take that too strictly.
00:03:23.040 --> 00:03:30.640
[Courtney] Yes. And since we are going to
be thinking about this from the lens of
00:03:30.640 --> 00:03:41.600
the asexual community, obviously asexuality itself
represents a spectrum. And in terms of whether an
00:03:41.600 --> 00:03:51.360
ace person might be sex favorable or sex neutral
or sex averse or repulsed, That’s sort of an easy
00:03:51.360 --> 00:03:57.600
simplified way to categorize different corners
of the spectrum. That doesn’t always necessarily
00:03:57.600 --> 00:04:05.200
mean a sex-favorable ace is always going to want
to have sex. A sex-neutral ace is not gonna care
00:04:05.200 --> 00:04:10.120
either way, and it’s totally going to depend
on whatever partners they may or may not have.
00:04:10.120 --> 00:04:17.600
[Courtney] It’s never going to be as clear-cut
as that, but knowing that we have this spectrum
00:04:17.600 --> 00:04:25.600
of experiences in our community. We know there
are some aces who are never going to have sex,
00:04:25.600 --> 00:04:31.040
never going to want that. There are going to be
some aces who do want sex, and there’s going to
00:04:31.040 --> 00:04:38.000
be a lot of people in between with their
own nuanced experience. So knowing that,
00:04:38.000 --> 00:04:43.840
what does consent often look like in our
community? And some of you might think that
00:04:43.840 --> 00:04:48.720
my main critique of enthusiastic
consent will mostly be for like,
00:04:48.720 --> 00:04:54.560
a stereotypical version of what a sex-neutral
ace might look like, someone who’s like, yeah,
00:04:54.560 --> 00:04:59.520
I might be up for it, I could take it, I could
leave it, doesn’t really matter to me either
00:04:59.520 --> 00:05:07.520
way. Because is that a theoretical person who
would ever be completely enthusiastic, like, yes,
00:05:07.520 --> 00:05:11.760
absolutely, this is a thing I definitely
really, really want on my own merits?
00:05:11.760 --> 00:05:16.560
[Courtney] Not all the time. Not
necessarily. But I also think,
00:05:16.560 --> 00:05:21.120
and here’s, here’s where the
conversation is gonna get quite muddy.
00:05:21.120 --> 00:05:28.320
[Courtney] I do want to break into the FRIES
model because that is a model presented by
00:05:28.320 --> 00:05:35.680
Planned Parenthood that I have seen most
often the very well-meaning sex educators
00:05:35.680 --> 00:05:42.640
thinking this is the nuanced model and this
is what we should all be aspiring to. It’s uh,
00:05:42.640 --> 00:05:48.480
tossed out in a very prescriptive way,
I often find. But I also think the idea
00:05:48.480 --> 00:05:55.040
of enthusiastic consent and the way it is
often talked about also does a disservice
00:05:55.040 --> 00:06:02.240
to not only sex-neutral aces, but
a lot of sex-averse aces as well.
00:06:02.240 --> 00:06:06.640
[Courtney] So the FRIES model—
again, all models are wrong,
00:06:06.640 --> 00:06:12.720
some are useful. F stands for freely
given, and this is all directly from
00:06:12.720 --> 00:06:18.720
Planned Parenthood’s website. Consenting
is a choice you make without pressure,
00:06:18.720 --> 00:06:24.120
manipulation, or under the influence of
drugs or alcohol. R stands for reversible.
00:06:24.120 --> 00:06:28.640
[Courtney] Anyone can change their mind
about what they feel like doing anytime,
00:06:28.640 --> 00:06:33.520
even if you’ve done it before and even
if you’re both naked in bed. Informed.
00:06:33.520 --> 00:06:37.600
You can only consent to something if
you have the full story. For example,
00:06:37.600 --> 00:06:42.160
if someone says they’ll use a condom and
then they don’t, there isn’t full consent.
00:06:42.160 --> 00:06:47.520
[Courtney] Enthusiastic. When it comes to
sex, you should only do stuff you WANT to do,
00:06:47.520 --> 00:06:52.840
that is in all caps, not things that you
feel you’re expected to do. Specific.
00:06:52.840 --> 00:06:57.600
[Courtney] Saying yes to one thing, like going
to the bedroom to make out, doesn’t mean you’ve
00:06:57.600 --> 00:07:02.560
said yes to others, like having sex. Now I
genuinely do want this to be a conversation,
00:07:02.560 --> 00:07:06.880
and Rice, I’m actually going to ask you
because this has been stewing in my head,
00:07:06.880 --> 00:07:10.160
uh, for the last couple weeks
knowing this episode is coming.
00:07:10.160 --> 00:07:20.960
[Courtney] Does anyone else think that it is a
little bit a problem that so many consent models
00:07:20.960 --> 00:07:26.920
are— gosh, how do I even word this? So all of
these say you. Consenting is: you make a choice.
00:07:26.920 --> 00:07:32.880
[Courtney] Enthusiastic means it’s something
you want to do. So it’s sort of— I understand
00:07:32.880 --> 00:07:37.680
it from the logic of like, my body, my
choice. But it seems more often like
00:07:37.680 --> 00:07:43.840
it’s teaching you what I should look like and
how I should be and what situation I should be
00:07:43.840 --> 00:07:50.240
like when I consent. And because that’s kind
of the base for most of these conversations,
00:07:50.240 --> 00:07:56.800
at least the ones that often get requoted and
re-talked about, it’s not really teaching it
00:07:56.800 --> 00:08:02.520
from the other perspective of like, what does it
look like when you have been given proper consent?
00:08:02.520 --> 00:08:09.680
[Royce] Oh, do you mean like the model is
basically teaching a person to identify if
00:08:09.680 --> 00:08:14.640
they themself have consented properly,
but not to identify if a partner has?
00:08:14.640 --> 00:08:15.320
[Courtney] Exactly.
00:08:15.320 --> 00:08:21.840
[Royce] And to follow that, that would mean that
everyone involved has a proper understanding of
00:08:21.840 --> 00:08:27.520
this, which is not really the case. Not
often the case. Not sometimes the case.
00:08:27.520 --> 00:08:33.760
[Courtney] I’m gonna have one cynical take on this
and then one nuanced take on this, so bear with
00:08:33.760 --> 00:08:41.840
me. This is, from my perspective, this model
is either teaching you how to give consent,
00:08:41.840 --> 00:08:48.640
which doesn’t do you any service if you have no
intention of giving consent, potentially ever,
00:08:48.640 --> 00:08:58.000
or it’s teaching you, perhaps, in retrospect,
when past encounters may have started blurring
00:08:58.000 --> 00:09:04.480
the lines into perhaps you were coerced
in a past situation. Perhaps there was
00:09:04.480 --> 00:09:09.360
a sexual assault that you weren’t at the time
able to identify what that is, but now you’ve
00:09:09.360 --> 00:09:15.800
been given the language like, oh well, it
wasn’t enthusiastic, or it wasn’t informed.
00:09:15.800 --> 00:09:21.200
[Courtney] And for those reasons, I
think this can be valuable. However,
00:09:21.200 --> 00:09:27.240
I have had so many conversations with
so many ace people over the years.
00:09:27.240 --> 00:09:34.480
[Courtney] And a fairly common asexual
experience is attempting, sometimes for years,
00:09:34.480 --> 00:09:40.400
to fit into an allosexual world and an allosexual
framework and attempting to have relationships
00:09:40.400 --> 00:09:45.840
that maybe you don’t want or don’t work for
you. And I have heard time and time again,
00:09:45.840 --> 00:09:51.280
and it is so hard for aces to actually
talk about this publicly, so these have
00:09:51.280 --> 00:09:58.720
all been private conversations, where aces
in a safe space can commiserate like this,
00:09:58.720 --> 00:10:04.640
where they say, yeah, I’ve always been
taught that consent should be enthusiastic,
00:10:04.640 --> 00:10:12.080
so I learned how to perform enthusiasm even
though that wasn’t what I actually wanted.
00:10:12.080 --> 00:10:20.800
And in situations like that, it can still be very
damaging. It can still feel very violating. It can
00:10:20.800 --> 00:10:28.800
still— Cause psychological ramifications down
the road. But one thing that models like this
00:10:28.800 --> 00:10:38.400
fail to encapsulate is the fact that, yes, on a
very surface level, in individual interactions,
00:10:38.400 --> 00:10:45.240
whether it’s two people or more, theoretically,
yes, consent is— let’s say two people in bed.
00:10:45.240 --> 00:10:49.040
[Courtney] Do you want to do this?
Yes, I do. Great, me too. Let’s do it.
00:10:49.040 --> 00:10:58.560
[Courtney] But there are larger overarching
social structures that complicate this a lot
00:10:58.560 --> 00:11:05.760
more than any of these individual consent models
that get thrown around can account for. And that
00:11:05.760 --> 00:11:12.360
is that the social rules do kind of change
with the establishment of a relationship.
00:11:12.360 --> 00:11:19.280
[Courtney] I’m not saying it should. I don’t
think it should. But it does. And if any of
00:11:19.280 --> 00:11:25.000
you recoil at that thought, I implore you
to just think through it a little longer.
00:11:25.000 --> 00:11:30.800
[Courtney] We’ve talked about this for
years where even legally speaking,
00:11:30.800 --> 00:11:38.880
there are marriage consummation laws. There are
situations where if a married couple does not
00:11:38.880 --> 00:11:45.760
have sex, the marriage may not have been legally
binding in the first place, it can be annulled.
00:11:45.760 --> 00:11:54.640
There are situations where, in cases of divorce,
one spouse can be found at fault for withholding
00:11:54.640 --> 00:12:03.040
sex, because that is what happens in our world if
a relationship, an ongoing long-term relationship
00:12:03.040 --> 00:12:09.920
has been established. The base assumption at
a society-wide level is that it is a sexual
00:12:09.920 --> 00:12:16.400
relationship. And think about all the posts
we’ve been over in dead bedrooms, you know,
00:12:16.400 --> 00:12:24.960
It’s always the person who is not having sex with
their partner who is withholding sex, who is being
00:12:24.960 --> 00:12:33.600
selfish, who is forcing the other person to remain
celibate. These are all words that are used.
00:12:33.600 --> 00:12:39.840
[Courtney] And since in a comprehensive sex
education, yes, of course consent should be talked
00:12:39.840 --> 00:12:47.360
about and that should be something we educate on,
the goal in most cases of proper sex education is
00:12:47.360 --> 00:12:55.520
to have those conversations with young people
before they get to that point so that they know
00:12:55.520 --> 00:13:01.280
what to look for or they know how to behave or how
they know how to, you know, I don’t even know if
00:13:01.280 --> 00:13:07.840
I want to give it credit for keeping yourself
safe because you can in your head know all the
00:13:07.840 --> 00:13:14.240
right ways to give consent and what it should look
like and dangerous situations can still happen. It
00:13:14.240 --> 00:13:19.480
doesn’t mean you will be safe from all of those
things just because you are educated on them.
00:13:19.480 --> 00:13:25.680
[Royce] Yeah, I think the aspect of it that
it leans to personal safety is helping
00:13:25.680 --> 00:13:31.200
someone who may not understand clarify
their own boundaries a little better.
00:13:31.200 --> 00:13:37.040
[Courtney] Correct. Which, clarifying your own
boundaries is great when you’re with someone
00:13:37.040 --> 00:13:43.040
who respects those boundaries. And so in a lot
of these situations, these conversations about
00:13:43.040 --> 00:13:51.040
consent, it’s talked about as either a first
encounter, a casual encounter. You hear it
00:13:51.040 --> 00:13:58.400
talked about a lot in like the kink community
or people who are having a lot of casual sex,
00:13:58.400 --> 00:14:02.800
one-night stands, how to keep yourself safe
and understand consent in those situations
00:14:02.800 --> 00:14:08.640
where perhaps you have many sexual partners.
But I think, and maybe not even for aces,
00:14:08.640 --> 00:14:18.360
but I think a lot of these models don’t do justice
to the ongoingness of a long-term relationship.
00:14:18.360 --> 00:14:23.440
[Courtney] Because think about the same phrase in
two different contexts. One phrase you might hear
00:14:23.440 --> 00:14:30.000
is, no means no, or no is a complete sentence, no
is a complete answer. You’ll hear those things.
00:14:30.000 --> 00:14:35.440
[Courtney] On a first date with someone
and they ask to go back to your place? No.
00:14:35.440 --> 00:14:37.520
Great, that’s a full answer. That makes sense.
00:14:37.520 --> 00:14:46.960
[Courtney] Now take a couple who’s been married for
10 years, and one spouse all of a sudden decides,
00:14:46.960 --> 00:14:53.200
you know, no, I don’t want to have sex anymore.
Is no a complete sentence anymore? Because
00:14:53.200 --> 00:14:59.520
nobody on the internet seems to think that
based on all of the conversations we’ve had.
00:14:59.520 --> 00:15:05.120
[Courtney] And what’s changed? What has changed
is that a relationship has been established and
00:15:05.120 --> 00:15:12.800
we don’t talk enough about how society imposes
different rules on that. And a lot of those rules
00:15:12.800 --> 00:15:19.920
do have legal implications, and consent at the
end of the day is also, as much as we use it like
00:15:19.920 --> 00:15:28.320
socially and as a, you know, catch-all phrase for
what healthy sexual interaction should look like,
00:15:28.320 --> 00:15:35.520
it’s also a word that is used in a court of law
to establish was there consent. Has consent been
00:15:35.520 --> 00:15:44.880
violated? And we still have organizations who
are very close to Congress, very close to the
00:15:44.880 --> 00:15:52.320
president, have a lot of money in think tanks
and politics and helping choose Supreme Court
00:15:52.320 --> 00:16:00.640
justices who are writing blogs saying things like
marriage should be conjugal, not consent-based. In
00:16:00.640 --> 00:16:08.800
a lot of places, there is no legal framework for
marital rape because in a lot of places, marriage
00:16:08.800 --> 00:16:17.920
being synonymous with sex is placed higher on the
hierarchy than individual personal autonomy is.
00:16:17.920 --> 00:16:26.480
[Courtney] These are things we really cannot
ignore. And there absolutely are situations where
00:16:26.480 --> 00:16:33.920
a certain type of person on the ace spectrum might
be completely fine with having a sexual encounter
00:16:33.920 --> 00:16:39.920
that predominantly does revolve around the other
person’s pleasure. And in the right context,
00:16:39.920 --> 00:16:48.480
that can be completely fine and wonderful in
that situation. And maybe the enthusiasticness
00:16:48.480 --> 00:16:58.400
of the consent wasn’t there, but maybe everything
else was. And within the establishment of trust,
00:16:58.400 --> 00:17:05.360
and perhaps even gaining a benefit from seeing
the enjoyment of your partner, can still make
00:17:05.360 --> 00:17:11.680
this a very positive encounter for both of
those people. There are also situations where
00:17:11.680 --> 00:17:19.520
a completely sex-averse ace does want a romantic
relationship, and they have been brought up in a
00:17:19.520 --> 00:17:26.480
society where at every turn they are told if you
have a romantic relationship, it must be sexual.
00:17:26.480 --> 00:17:31.920
[Courtney] Here is what it needs to look like. If
it’s not a sexual relationship, you either can’t
00:17:31.920 --> 00:17:37.760
have it or you’re the asshole, actually. You’re
the one who’s going to be violating the other
00:17:37.760 --> 00:17:46.640
person’s right to have a sexual relationship.
Therefore, we do have a lot of ace people who
00:17:46.640 --> 00:17:52.800
will see models like this and in their own
personal lives, in their own private minds,
00:17:52.800 --> 00:17:59.600
what they do is learn how to perform what consent
looks like despite in their heart of hearts not
00:17:59.600 --> 00:18:06.800
actually enjoying or being willing to do these
acts. And when aces like that, at the end of the
00:18:06.800 --> 00:18:15.680
day in hindsight, still feel violated, still feel
upset, still feel unhappy, but they consented on
00:18:15.680 --> 00:18:24.000
paper, they said yes, they did the performance,
they tried to fit into this allosexual framework,
00:18:24.000 --> 00:18:30.800
There can be a great loss just feeling like, I
am hurt and damaged, but who do I have to blame?
00:18:30.800 --> 00:18:35.520
[Courtney] I did what I was supposed
to do, so the other person didn’t do
00:18:35.520 --> 00:18:41.440
anything wrong. And I don’t think it’s
right, but it’s common that that ace
00:18:41.440 --> 00:18:47.680
will blame themselves. And that can turn into,
over time, if not dealt with in a healthy way,
00:18:47.680 --> 00:18:57.520
that can turn to self-loathing, that can turn
to lowered self-esteem. It’s very, very toxic.
00:18:57.520 --> 00:19:04.960
[Courtney] I have heard aces share similar
versions of these same types of encounters
00:19:04.960 --> 00:19:10.080
who in retrospect will say things like,
I’ve heard this on more than one occasion,
00:19:10.080 --> 00:19:18.400
self-assault, where it’s not a large spoken open
community conversation. It’s not like we have a
00:19:18.400 --> 00:19:25.120
big agreed-upon language for what this situation
is, but I’ve heard more than one ace person say,
00:19:25.120 --> 00:19:30.280
yeah, it felt like self-assault, it felt like I
got assaulted, but I’m the one who did this to me.
00:19:30.280 --> 00:19:38.960
[Courtney] And that is deeply insidious
because these models of consent don’t
00:19:38.960 --> 00:19:45.280
acknowledge the societal coercion. Some of
them do specifically talk about coercion.
00:19:45.280 --> 00:19:50.240
[Courtney] And the issues with it and how to
identify it, but it’s all on an individual
00:19:50.240 --> 00:19:58.880
case-to-case basis. And people can and do
get coerced by societal pressures in very
00:19:58.880 --> 00:20:05.520
much the same way that they can get coerced
by individual one-on-one pressures. And so
00:20:05.520 --> 00:20:12.880
those are two polar opposite examples for
why enthusiastic consent can fail aces. One
00:20:12.880 --> 00:20:18.080
who can still have a very positive,
healthy, happy sexual relationship,
00:20:18.080 --> 00:20:24.320
but enthusiasm doesn’t tell the whole story.
And one who is taught, this is what I need
00:20:24.320 --> 00:20:29.280
to do if I want a romantic relationship.
So I’m just going to follow the script.
00:20:29.280 --> 00:20:35.280
[Courtney] And at the end of the day, that
is not a healthy thing for that individual.
00:20:35.280 --> 00:20:40.880
So when talking about enthusiastic
consent, a lot of people will for one,
00:20:40.880 --> 00:20:46.160
a lot of people using this as a prescriptive,
this is what consent looks like model,
00:20:46.160 --> 00:20:52.960
are people for whom they have the ability
and desire to give enthusiastic consent. So
00:20:52.960 --> 00:20:58.720
they’re very often not coming from a framework
of what if someone is never going to have this
00:20:58.720 --> 00:21:04.560
type of enthusiasm? They aren’t thinking
about asexual experiences to begin with.
00:21:04.560 --> 00:21:10.800
[Royce] Yeah, without even getting into the
huge societal model and pressure of things,
00:21:10.800 --> 00:21:16.960
it does definitely weight enthusiasm to
personal enthusiasm and not the sort of,
00:21:16.960 --> 00:21:23.040
you know, vicarious positive feelings you
might feel from doing something good for
00:21:23.040 --> 00:21:29.040
another person. Like, most couples have
at least some idea of what it is like
00:21:29.040 --> 00:21:34.720
to give the other person a massage if
they’re sore or tired after work. They
00:21:34.720 --> 00:21:41.160
probably don’t feel anything particularly
positive performing the physical action.
00:21:41.160 --> 00:21:45.680
[Courtney] Man, your, your neck knots
feel so good on my fingers right now.
00:21:45.680 --> 00:21:52.320
[Royce] Yeah, yeah, I love the strain in my
hands from trying to do this for 10 minutes. Um,
00:21:52.320 --> 00:21:59.520
but doing something nice for something— someone
that you care about tends to have a positive
00:21:59.520 --> 00:22:06.160
feeling associated with it. It’s not the same as
being in the midst of arousal with someone you’re
00:22:06.160 --> 00:22:12.480
sexually attracted to getting into it. But it is a
positive thing that should qualify under a broader
00:22:12.480 --> 00:22:17.120
term of consent. But there’s also one of the
things that gets brought up in conversations like
00:22:17.120 --> 00:22:23.160
this is couples who are trying to conceive, where
they’re having some sort of fertility issues.
00:22:23.160 --> 00:22:29.360
[Royce] And now they’ve gone to a doctor and
they’re on a schedule. And the timer goes off
00:22:29.360 --> 00:22:32.240
or the, you know, they get a notification
on their phone. And they’re like, oh,
00:22:32.240 --> 00:22:35.760
it’s time. I’m tired. You’re tired. We
know this. We’re both sore. We just have
00:22:35.760 --> 00:22:39.920
to get it over with. Yeah, we’re on the
clock. Let’s, let’s just get this done.
00:22:39.920 --> 00:22:46.640
[Courtney] And nobody is going to tell them you
did sex wrong. They just had a different goal than
00:22:46.640 --> 00:22:52.880
personal pleasure. Because that’s another thing
too. Personal pleasure is very much underlining
00:22:52.880 --> 00:22:59.680
a lot of these conversations. And that’s where the
enthusiastic framework, I think, often comes from.
00:22:59.680 --> 00:23:05.280
[Courtney] But to your point about
You know, doing something because
00:23:05.280 --> 00:23:10.960
you do get vicarious enjoyment from your
partner’s pleasure. That’s the thing that,
00:23:10.960 --> 00:23:14.160
I mean, even some allosexuals can relate to that.
00:23:14.160 --> 00:23:19.600
[Royce] There’s something, I guess,
not explicitly spoken about the word
00:23:19.600 --> 00:23:26.560
enthusiastic in terms of consent that makes
me feel that most people interpret it to be
00:23:26.560 --> 00:23:34.800
paired and equal. And there are a lot of
cases where an individual sexual session,
00:23:34.800 --> 00:23:40.376
the focus may not be equal on both
people’s pleasure at the same time.
00:23:40.376 --> 00:23:40.393
[Courtney] Mm-hmm.
00:23:40.393 --> 00:23:44.480
[Royce] It may be depending on—
particularly if you’re getting into,
00:23:44.480 --> 00:23:49.920
you know, really anything in the kink realm,
there may be one person who is doing something
00:23:49.920 --> 00:23:54.400
more on the other’s behalf. And then maybe you
switch at a different session. It’s not always,
00:23:54.400 --> 00:23:56.480
you know, one and the same or paired in that way.
00:23:56.480 --> 00:24:04.720
[Courtney] And the thing about that is, like, when
I say the rules are different for relationships
00:24:04.720 --> 00:24:11.280
in different ways, that is for, like, long-term
romantic relationships, like people who do get
00:24:11.280 --> 00:24:17.040
married and just have potentially even monogamous
sex the rest of their life, but also for, like,
00:24:17.040 --> 00:24:22.800
ongoing sexual relationships that might not
be romantic when people— When people have,
00:24:22.800 --> 00:24:32.000
like, pre-established kink partners. And they
will have sessions repeatedly over a lengthy
00:24:32.000 --> 00:24:39.040
period of time or ongoing, there is going to
be feedback and conversation and adjusting. But
00:24:39.040 --> 00:24:44.880
in those kind of situations, there might
even be experimentation where, you know,
00:24:44.880 --> 00:24:49.040
maybe it gets to a point where someone
isn’t super enthusiastic about something,
00:24:49.040 --> 00:24:52.000
maybe they don’t even know if
they’re gonna like something,
00:24:52.000 --> 00:24:57.760
but maybe it is still mutually and willingly
agreed upon that like, yeah, let’s try this.
00:24:57.760 --> 00:25:02.720
[Courtney] And see how it works. And
of course, in those situations, yes,
00:25:02.720 --> 00:25:06.480
it should be revocable. If you get
into it and decide, oh, no, no, no,
00:25:06.480 --> 00:25:11.360
this actually isn’t for me. Yes, that needs to be
able to be communicated and stopped immediately.
00:25:11.360 --> 00:25:16.640
[Royce] That’s, that’s what safe words
are for. A lot of kink or otherwise
00:25:16.640 --> 00:25:21.520
explorations are about finding your lines
and stepping as close to them as you can.
00:25:21.520 --> 00:25:26.480
[Courtney] And even, even think about
like the most vanilla straight cis,
00:25:26.480 --> 00:25:31.360
like monogamous married couple long term you
can think of, what is the number one advice for
00:25:31.360 --> 00:25:39.160
saving their marriage if they’re a little on the
rocks. Like, well, time to spice up the bedroom.
00:25:39.160 --> 00:25:42.400
[Royce] Time to add a third
position to your rotation.
00:25:42.400 --> 00:25:47.520
[Courtney] Time to— right? Like,
even though I think those bits of
00:25:47.520 --> 00:25:53.440
advice are extremely reductive, and I
completely reject the entire framework
00:25:53.440 --> 00:25:59.280
of sex is going to inherently save
your marriage, even for allosexuals.
00:25:59.280 --> 00:26:06.400
That is the, shall we say, conventional
wisdom, like spice up the bedroom.
00:26:06.400 --> 00:26:14.240
[Courtney] And yeah, sometimes finding those
boundaries, there might be situations on an
00:26:14.240 --> 00:26:18.640
individual level where it’s like, yeah,
I don’t know that this is a thing I want,
00:26:18.640 --> 00:26:26.000
but I am willing to try for you. But
let’s talk about the word willing,
00:26:26.000 --> 00:26:30.320
because there are also situations where
something can look very similar, like, oh,
00:26:30.320 --> 00:26:33.520
I really want to try this, I really want to try
it. Maybe you’re even hounding someone for years.
00:26:33.520 --> 00:26:36.160
[Courtney] I really want to try this.
No, no, no, I really want to try it. No.
00:26:36.160 --> 00:26:39.520
[Courtney] And you keep asking, you keep
hounding, and eventually you have worn
00:26:39.520 --> 00:26:45.040
that person down and they’re like, okay,
all right, fine. That’s a bad version of
00:26:45.040 --> 00:26:52.160
arguably a very similar situation. So how
do you actually delineate the difference
00:26:52.160 --> 00:27:01.360
between what is an acceptable and healthy
attempt to see what happens, to explore,
00:27:01.360 --> 00:27:08.320
to find the boundary versus someone just got
worn down and coerced in a very unhealthy way.
00:27:08.320 --> 00:27:15.600
[Courtney] I think the keyword is willing. And
there actually is a framework out there that I
00:27:15.600 --> 00:27:22.400
think, again, not perfect, But I do think more
people in the ace community need to know about
00:27:22.400 --> 00:27:29.840
it because I think it’s a lot more applicable
to a wider variety of our experiences than the
00:27:29.840 --> 00:27:38.160
FRIES model or other similar enthusiastic
consent conversations. And this framework
00:27:38.160 --> 00:27:45.120
was created by Emily Nagoski, who—
I have seen some of Emily’s work,
00:27:45.120 --> 00:27:50.320
some of it I think is better than others from
an ace perspective, I don’t think everything
00:27:50.320 --> 00:27:56.160
Emily’s ever said has been perfectly
considerate of the ace community, but oh,
00:27:56.160 --> 00:28:02.000
you better believe every other sex researcher
I have come across has probably been much,
00:28:02.000 --> 00:28:11.200
much worse. But in this framework, you take
the idea of consent and you don’t say, like
00:28:11.200 --> 00:28:17.800
many of the other models do, that this is the only
true consent, this is the one way consent looks.
00:28:17.800 --> 00:28:25.360
[Courtney] And instead it gets categorized into
four different types of consent. One of which
00:28:25.360 --> 00:28:32.080
is enthusiastic consent. ’Cause of course that
does exist for some people, many people in fact,
00:28:32.080 --> 00:28:40.560
where it is something you want to do. But right
alongside enthusiastic consent is willing consent.
00:28:40.560 --> 00:28:47.520
And what willing consent might look like is...
You know, I’m pretty sure this will be okay.
00:28:47.520 --> 00:28:53.440
I don’t think there will be any negative
ramifications if I say yes. I don’t think
00:28:53.440 --> 00:29:00.080
I’m going to regret this. I think I might get
some sort of enjoyment vicariously through what
00:29:00.080 --> 00:29:07.360
this is doing for you. Maybe I’m not feeling it
right now, but maybe I will once we get into it.
00:29:07.360 --> 00:29:13.480
[Courtney] Like, this is a willing consent. You
are willing to do this and you are saying yes.
00:29:13.480 --> 00:29:18.000
[Courtney] It doesn’t necessarily mean it’s
enthusiastic. It doesn’t necessarily mean
00:29:18.000 --> 00:29:24.560
both people in this situation are going to be
at like inherently equal amounts of pleasure
00:29:24.560 --> 00:29:30.640
with this particular act or this particular
session. But along with willing consent comes
00:29:30.640 --> 00:29:38.960
unwilling consent. And that is the phrase
that I think so many aces who have tried
00:29:38.960 --> 00:29:45.120
to fit into allosexual norms, thinking this
is what a relationship needs to look like,
00:29:45.120 --> 00:29:50.160
this is how I have to perform, I have to
do this for my partner. But not only do
00:29:50.160 --> 00:29:54.080
I have to do this for my partner, I have
to make my partner think that I really,
00:29:54.080 --> 00:30:03.520
really want to do this actually. Unwilling
consent can be given even if this person’s
00:30:03.520 --> 00:30:09.360
partner is not doing something wrong. It of course
can happen if they’re doing something wrong, but
00:30:09.360 --> 00:30:14.480
I’m gonna put a pin in that and save that because
that’s what our 4th category kind of covers.
00:30:14.480 --> 00:30:20.080
[Courtney] So unwilling consent to
me and to my perspective of many
00:30:20.080 --> 00:30:25.920
ace experiences that are so hard
to talk about is that, you know,
00:30:25.920 --> 00:30:30.000
consent on paper, you know, on paper, I
said yes, I did what I was supposed to
00:30:30.000 --> 00:30:34.680
do. I even forced myself to put on a smile
because that’s what you’re supposed to do.
00:30:34.680 --> 00:30:40.320
[Courtney] But I didn’t like it. I didn’t
want it. Maybe I regret it after the fact.
00:30:40.320 --> 00:30:45.840
[Courtney] This is where you
are letting societal norms,
00:30:45.840 --> 00:30:53.200
societal pressure guide what you’re doing in
interpersonal situations. And it happens all
00:30:53.200 --> 00:31:01.280
too often. And I haven’t found many other consent
models that actually account for that situation.
00:31:01.280 --> 00:31:09.520
Unwilling consent might be given if someone
fears the consequences of saying no more than
00:31:09.520 --> 00:31:17.360
the consequences of allowing their own internal
boundaries to be broken and unspoken often. And
00:31:17.360 --> 00:31:24.400
that can look like, you know, people pleasing
tendencies, like, I don’t want to do this, but I,
00:31:24.400 --> 00:31:30.080
you know, haven’t developed confident,
healthy ways to say no to people.
00:31:30.080 --> 00:31:36.080
[Royce] That can also happen in a relationship
where there’s any amount of ongoing conflict
00:31:36.080 --> 00:31:42.480
around this topic where sort of doing the
mental math of which is going to hurt worse,
00:31:42.480 --> 00:31:44.600
going through with it or having the argument.
00:31:44.600 --> 00:31:54.720
[Courtney] Yeah, or, or in not individual basis,
but just think about a romantic ace person who
00:31:54.720 --> 00:31:59.920
just does want a romantic relationship,
but has been told it has to be sexual,
00:31:59.920 --> 00:32:05.600
or else you don’t get to have this thing that you
want. That might be a much bigger question than
00:32:05.600 --> 00:32:13.680
this individual one-on-one situation. It might be,
if I want a romantic relationship, period, I must
00:32:13.680 --> 00:32:18.840
have sex with these people or this person or the
person I want to be my long-term romantic partner.
00:32:18.840 --> 00:32:27.760
[Courtney] So that is still technically,
legally, verbally giving consent. But inside,
00:32:27.760 --> 00:32:34.560
that person is not willing. And that
is what people need to understand.
00:32:34.560 --> 00:32:41.200
[Courtney] It’s also something that for people who
have a history of experiencing sexual assault,
00:32:41.200 --> 00:32:48.480
sometimes that can just become almost a safety
measure where it almost feels safer to give
00:32:48.480 --> 00:32:58.240
consent on paper, even if you don’t want to, than
it is to say no, because maybe you have seen how
00:32:58.240 --> 00:33:06.800
deeply unsafe or violent things can turn when
consent is actually withheld. And I like that
00:33:06.800 --> 00:33:13.520
the fourth and final one is considered coerced
consent under this model, because that makes
00:33:13.520 --> 00:33:18.400
space for the fact that if this is coerced
consent, this is on an individual basis.
00:33:18.400 --> 00:33:26.240
[Courtney] The other person has threatened
you or given you an ultimatum, or they have
00:33:26.240 --> 00:33:35.280
said or done something to actively insinuate that
they may become unsafe and violent if you do not
00:33:35.280 --> 00:33:44.720
say no. This is the person is directly making
you feel unsafe, and so you say yes. That is
00:33:44.720 --> 00:33:50.800
different from unwilling consent. Coerced consent,
unwilling. And then on the other side of things,
00:33:50.800 --> 00:33:57.040
you have willing consent and enthusiastic consent.
So in this model, there are two situations that
00:33:57.040 --> 00:34:02.160
can be very positive and healthy for everyone
involved, and they are different things.
00:34:02.160 --> 00:34:07.840
[Courtney] Enthusiastic consent, yes, can be
wonderful. Willing consent can also be wonderful,
00:34:07.840 --> 00:34:13.440
but that’s the one where everyone who
has enthusiastic consent just beaten into
00:34:13.440 --> 00:34:18.960
their brains through discourse over the years,
through feminist theory, through sex education,
00:34:18.960 --> 00:34:25.520
Through sex positivity, it is really hard
to break away from that concept of consent
00:34:25.520 --> 00:34:31.600
must be enthusiastic or it’s not consent.
But this idea of willing consent, I think,
00:34:31.600 --> 00:34:39.680
needs to be added to more people’s framework.
Because then on the other side of things,
00:34:39.680 --> 00:34:43.920
unwilling consent and coerced
consent, both very unhealthy.
00:34:43.920 --> 00:34:48.720
[Courtney] But also look very
different from each other.
00:34:48.720 --> 00:34:57.200
Now I will say, it— all of these have their
own individual nuances. And this again is a
00:34:57.200 --> 00:35:05.120
framework for me and my body and my choice and
my underlying thoughts and feelings about this.
00:35:05.120 --> 00:35:12.000
[Courtney] Therefore, as incredibly helpful
as I think this can be for more people to
00:35:12.000 --> 00:35:17.520
learn about and internalize, and especially
the ace community, I think there’s often an
00:35:17.520 --> 00:35:25.920
anxiety that by nature of there being a concept of
willing consent that is agreed upon as something
00:35:25.920 --> 00:35:32.240
that isn’t inherently wrong or unhealthy in
every situation, that that can open the door
00:35:32.240 --> 00:35:39.040
to more coerced consent. Because, you know, oh,
if someone learns, well, yeah, some people have
00:35:39.040 --> 00:35:45.520
sex just because their partner really likes it, or
some people might do this because they should just
00:35:45.520 --> 00:35:52.240
be happy that their partner’s happy, then I think
the concern is often, well, now someone’s going to
00:35:52.240 --> 00:35:57.760
use that as like, well, if some people do this
despite not being enthusiastic, why can’t you?
00:35:57.760 --> 00:36:05.760
[Courtney] And use that as another tool to coerce
others. But I quite frankly think coerced consent
00:36:05.760 --> 00:36:14.000
happens so often that I like, I don’t think more
education on this is going to lead to more of it
00:36:14.000 --> 00:36:20.320
because I think that’s already one of the tools
for coercive people to use that’s out there.
00:36:20.320 --> 00:36:28.080
[Courtney] And that’s already what, on a societal
level, people do and say when the context of a
00:36:28.080 --> 00:36:34.000
relationship is added. Like, well, you married
this person, this is your long-term relationship,
00:36:34.000 --> 00:36:38.200
you have to do this for them, you
have to keep that person happy.
00:36:38.200 --> 00:36:42.160
[Courtney] And so that’s, that’s the
power of naming it, naming the fact
00:36:42.160 --> 00:36:48.400
that willing consent exists. And unwilling
consent exists. We need to name it and be
00:36:48.400 --> 00:36:52.800
aware that those exist. And it very well
may be that someone will come out with an
00:36:52.800 --> 00:36:58.040
even better model that will not use this
language but still use these concepts.
00:36:58.040 --> 00:37:01.760
[Courtney] And that is fine. And we
should allow this conversation to
00:37:01.760 --> 00:37:08.000
adapt as needed. But what we don’t
need is for things to go so hard in
00:37:08.000 --> 00:37:13.440
one direction that it loses all nuance for
the people for whom it does not. work for.
00:37:13.440 --> 00:37:20.240
[Courtney] I think just by nature of naming that
willing consent exists makes it— should make it
00:37:20.240 --> 00:37:26.640
even easier to identify when there is a hardline
difference between willing consent and coerced
00:37:26.640 --> 00:37:33.200
consent, because those are two distinct things.
Because there are also a couple of concepts that
00:37:33.200 --> 00:37:41.520
I often also find are completely left out
of consent models, but are nevertheless
00:37:41.520 --> 00:37:53.160
very important. And that is, quite frankly,
trust and respect. Do you trust your partner?
00:37:53.160 --> 00:37:57.120
[Courtney] Because going back to
the FRIES model, for example,
00:37:57.120 --> 00:38:02.720
the Planned Parenthood as one example
of what is and is not informed consent,
00:38:02.720 --> 00:38:07.280
you can only consent to something if you
have the full story. For example, If someone
00:38:07.280 --> 00:38:13.440
says they’ll use a condom and then they don’t,
that is not full consent. That’s good to know.
00:38:13.440 --> 00:38:20.960
[Courtney] However, before this encounter even
begins, do you trust that your partner gave you
00:38:20.960 --> 00:38:26.240
full information? Do you trust that they
won’t pull the rug out from under you? Do
00:38:26.240 --> 00:38:31.920
you trust that if you say no or ask to stop
in the moment that they will actually stop?
00:38:31.920 --> 00:38:37.200
[Royce] Trust is a good thing to bring
up because clearly a physical object,
00:38:37.200 --> 00:38:42.080
a condom, was mentioned, but a
part of any discussion with a
00:38:42.080 --> 00:38:48.240
new partner should be health and
potential STIs and testing. And—
00:38:48.240 --> 00:38:49.560
[Courtney] Do you trust them?
00:38:49.560 --> 00:38:52.320
[Royce] Do you trust them? Are you
going to ask for the paperwork?
00:38:52.320 --> 00:39:00.720
[Courtney] Yeah, and trust does start looking
different over time. When a relationship is
00:39:00.720 --> 00:39:07.840
established, because obviously for a one-night
stand situation, you are not going to have as much
00:39:07.840 --> 00:39:16.000
information with which to determine whether or not
you trust this person as a long-term relationship
00:39:16.000 --> 00:39:22.560
has. And I’m in this situation using relationship
to mean potentially it is a married couple,
00:39:22.560 --> 00:39:27.200
potentially it is like long-term kink partners.
I don’t care if it’s just sexual or if it’s
00:39:27.200 --> 00:39:31.840
sexual and romantic, if you have a long-term
established relationship with that person,
00:39:31.840 --> 00:39:35.040
you have a lot more information,
you’ve had a lot more feedback,
00:39:35.040 --> 00:39:40.080
you’ve seen how they react in different
situations. And with that information in mind,
00:39:40.080 --> 00:39:45.920
hopefully it’s a very healthy, positive
relationship and the trust has grown.
00:39:45.920 --> 00:39:52.400
Hopefully your trust hasn’t been broken and
now you are actively suspicious of this person.
00:39:52.400 --> 00:39:59.040
[Courtney] But Trust does get built
upon. So I do think that in addition
00:39:59.040 --> 00:40:08.240
to understanding the willing and
unwilling categories of consent,
00:40:08.240 --> 00:40:13.440
I really think there should be more
inherent conversations about trust.
00:40:13.440 --> 00:40:17.760
[Courtney] Because it is gonna look different for
other people. Everyone’s gonna have a different
00:40:17.760 --> 00:40:24.240
sort of risk tolerance. People are going to have
different thresholds for what they want to see
00:40:24.240 --> 00:40:30.720
before they start to trust someone. And I don’t
think it should ever be held against someone if
00:40:30.720 --> 00:40:37.600
they need a little more time before they begin
engaging in sexual activity because they haven’t
00:40:37.600 --> 00:40:46.400
yet established that trust they need in order to
have the type of sexual encounter that they want.
00:40:46.400 --> 00:40:52.480
And maybe this is just a personal gripe
and not a big societal-wide commentary,
00:40:52.480 --> 00:40:58.960
but it does a little bit— it has started
driving me up the wall just a little bit
00:40:58.960 --> 00:41:06.160
with how often I hear people pull
out the like, consent is sexy.
00:41:06.160 --> 00:41:13.840
[Courtney] This fully just might be a personal
gripe, but you start to see like, in commentary,
00:41:13.840 --> 00:41:19.040
and usually it’s commentary in reaction
to, for example, like voice memo guy,
00:41:19.040 --> 00:41:25.280
we talked about that last week. When, when
there’s a very clear example of someone not,
00:41:25.280 --> 00:41:32.080
quote, practicing good consent, there will often
be at least some portion of, more often than not,
00:41:32.080 --> 00:41:39.120
women who start to say like, don’t they know
consent is sexy? Like, I didn’t— necessarily
00:41:39.120 --> 00:41:45.200
want to have sex with this person until he
started talking about my boundaries, and now
00:41:45.200 --> 00:41:50.000
I’m all hot and bothered because consent is so
sexy and he understands that. And the thing is,
00:41:50.000 --> 00:41:55.280
the thing is, the thing is, I don’t even
think that most of those people believe
00:41:55.280 --> 00:42:03.440
that consent is sexy. I think it just comes
down to trust, and I think certain elements
00:42:03.440 --> 00:42:10.720
of practicing consent or demonstrating that
you understand at least a basic framework of
00:42:10.720 --> 00:42:15.520
consent, I think helps move the needle in a
direction of maybe I can trust this person.
00:42:15.520 --> 00:42:20.520
[Courtney] So I think it’s more
trust than the actual word consent.
00:42:20.520 --> 00:42:27.840
[Royce] I feel like the whole consent is sexy
thing came from a backlash to an earlier
00:42:27.840 --> 00:42:34.800
attempt to have discussions of consent more
frequently. Where the idea of someone asking,
00:42:34.800 --> 00:42:40.800
hey, can I do this, in the middle of
both parties being all hot and bothered,
00:42:40.800 --> 00:42:45.320
people were like, oh, you’re
ruining the mood, just go for it.
00:42:45.320 --> 00:42:51.200
[Courtney] Uh, it’s because I don’t
think consent is, um, even capable
00:42:51.200 --> 00:42:57.920
of being sexy. I think as a concept, I
don’t know, I— grain of salt everything,
00:42:57.920 --> 00:43:05.080
nothing is sexy. Nothing is sexy. Sexiness
does not exist in my head or in my world.
00:43:05.080 --> 00:43:11.840
[Courtney] But from what I know about consent,
and with the framework I’m working with, where,
00:43:11.840 --> 00:43:16.640
yeah, enthusiastic consent works for some
people, for some people willing consent is
00:43:16.640 --> 00:43:21.760
the closest you’re gonna get to that. Then
you have unwilling consent, which is very
00:43:21.760 --> 00:43:26.400
much not a good thing. Then you have coerced
consent, which is very much not a good thing.
00:43:26.400 --> 00:43:32.960
I guess I am thinking about it more from
like a transactional standpoint. Like,
00:43:32.960 --> 00:43:38.080
you said yes, you said or did
a thing, that means proceed.
00:43:38.080 --> 00:43:43.040
[Courtney] Totally devoid of what the
context is. And to me, the context is
00:43:43.040 --> 00:43:50.120
everything that matters. So do I think that
context can be sexy for some people? Yes.
00:43:50.120 --> 00:43:57.040
[Courtney] In most cases, when I hear consent
is sexy, I think it’s just the other party
00:43:57.040 --> 00:44:07.760
said or did something that is fostering your
trust in them. So maybe trust is sexy. Allos,
00:44:07.760 --> 00:44:13.200
please advise, is trust sexy? Is that
a thing I can say with my whole chest?
00:44:13.200 --> 00:44:18.480
[Courtney] So even knowing full well that
people have different thresholds for trust,
00:44:18.480 --> 00:44:26.480
I think trust should be more of a conversation.
When it comes to these discussions. What I think
00:44:26.480 --> 00:44:34.840
we’re gonna talk about more next week is the
other side of that coin, which is respect.
00:44:34.840 --> 00:44:42.720
[Courtney] Because I do often fear that some
of the vehemently sex-positive discourse
00:44:42.720 --> 00:44:49.440
has gotten so far in the direction of— I
was gonna say individuality, but I almost
00:44:49.440 --> 00:44:56.800
wanna say selfishness. Like only thinking about
yourself and only thinking about your own needs,
00:44:56.800 --> 00:45:05.680
that I think it has led to excusing a lot of bad
behavior from people who have not demonstrated
00:45:05.680 --> 00:45:12.320
that they actually respect the person they’re
engaging in a sexual relationship with. Because
00:45:12.320 --> 00:45:19.360
even in situations of casual sex where
neither party wants this or intends this
00:45:19.360 --> 00:45:23.360
to become a romantic relationship and
they are on the same page with that,
00:45:23.360 --> 00:45:28.960
they both still need to have a basic amount of
respect for one another. And utterly missing
00:45:28.960 --> 00:45:36.720
from the conversation of informed consent and
expressing boundaries and talking about needs
00:45:36.720 --> 00:45:45.280
and wants, I think it has gotten so individually
minded that we do start excusing bad behavior.
00:45:45.280 --> 00:45:52.240
[Courtney] We do. So we need more discussions
about not only what, quote, consent looks like,
00:45:52.240 --> 00:46:00.800
but what trust and respect look like in
these situations. And I also want to caution,
00:46:00.800 --> 00:46:05.840
and here’s where like prescriptive consent
conversations do start to bother me,
00:46:05.840 --> 00:46:08.800
where it’s like, this is what
it needs to look like, X, Y,
00:46:08.800 --> 00:46:15.920
and Z. And if these situations are— if you observe
this from your partner, then full steam ahead,
00:46:15.920 --> 00:46:23.200
everything’s good to go. And even the consent
is sexy discussions? I sometimes worry that
00:46:23.200 --> 00:46:32.880
we are using the framework of consent to just
become a new way to conceptualize transactional
00:46:32.880 --> 00:46:40.960
sexual relationships. Because mind you, this is
during a time where we do have manosphere and
00:46:40.960 --> 00:46:48.320
adjacent commenters out here who are saying—
Full well, usually the incredibly reductive,
00:46:48.320 --> 00:46:55.760
like, men want sex, it is what they want, women
are the gatekeepers of sex, and so everything a
00:46:55.760 --> 00:47:02.320
man does in the dating or courting process is to
obtain sex, so he needs to spend time with her,
00:47:02.320 --> 00:47:08.160
he needs to listen to her stories, maybe he
needs to buy her dinner, and all of these is
00:47:08.160 --> 00:47:17.080
the cost of sex, and it’s talked about in a very—
monetary and time-cost and transactional way.
00:47:17.080 --> 00:47:24.800
[Courtney] They are spending money and time
in order to obtain sex. And for so often,
00:47:24.800 --> 00:47:29.360
like, for people who— the shockingly high
number of people who are going to listen
00:47:29.360 --> 00:47:34.560
to commenters like that are going to say, okay,
if I want this, I just have to do that. And they
00:47:34.560 --> 00:47:40.480
are very selfishly looking out for their own
interests and not fundamentally respecting or
00:47:40.480 --> 00:47:46.400
looking out for the other person’s interest. And
I do worry that when too many people out there
00:47:46.400 --> 00:47:53.840
start saying consent is sexy, consent is sexy,
that some people who haven’t fully developed
00:47:53.840 --> 00:47:59.120
their practice of respect— I’m gonna call it
a practice of respect instead of a practice of
00:47:59.120 --> 00:48:06.320
consent— For people who haven’t fully developed
their practice of respect, for another person,
00:48:06.320 --> 00:48:12.560
I think they’re going to see it as like, oh,
this is what I have to do in order to obtain sex.
00:48:12.560 --> 00:48:19.760
[Courtney] And that just continues a new way
of following a script to get what you want.
00:48:19.760 --> 00:48:28.240
Maybe that’s a little overly cynical of me, but
I’m thinking of— let’s go old school, let’s go
00:48:28.240 --> 00:48:35.920
to Immanuel Kant, where he would talk about,
you know, rewarding a child for good behavior.
00:48:35.920 --> 00:48:41.920
[Courtney] Teaches them to act for personal
gain. That’s the, like, moral deserts. Like,
00:48:41.920 --> 00:48:47.040
you only do good things for other people
because you think you’re going to get
00:48:47.040 --> 00:48:53.040
rewarded for it. Immanuel Kant would
order, that’s not having, you know,
00:48:53.040 --> 00:49:00.880
inherent morality. That’s not practicing
good ethics if it is all selfish in the end.
00:49:00.880 --> 00:49:06.240
[Courtney] And I’ve even heard anecdotally, and I
don’t know how many of these are real scenarios
00:49:06.240 --> 00:49:12.560
that actually happen, Or if it’s just the way
people talk online. At this point in my life,
00:49:12.560 --> 00:49:16.120
I talk to a lot more aces than
I do allos on a regular basis.
00:49:16.120 --> 00:49:25.520
[Courtney] But I’ve seen for years social media
posts of women saying like, oh, I wasn’t going
00:49:25.520 --> 00:49:34.080
to have sex with this man, I wasn’t prepared for
this, I didn’t want this yet, but as soon as he
00:49:34.080 --> 00:49:41.760
you know, asked me for my consent, or as soon as
he expressed that he understood what consent was,
00:49:41.760 --> 00:49:51.040
then I was turned on and I was horny and we went
for it because consent is sexy. And yeah, do,
00:49:51.040 --> 00:49:58.000
do I actually think there are people out there
who haven’t developed their respect practice yet
00:49:58.000 --> 00:50:04.400
who are gonna see that and be like, I see, So
that is a shortcut to getting the thing that is
00:50:04.400 --> 00:50:11.200
solely within my own self-interest and is to have
sex with this person. Yeah, I do. I really do.
00:50:11.200 --> 00:50:16.160
[Courtney] So we’re gonna follow that train
of thought more next week because I want
00:50:16.160 --> 00:50:21.600
to circle back to a topic we’ve already
touched on but is extremely relevant now,
00:50:21.600 --> 00:50:27.520
and that is the right to sex.
Do people have a right to sex?
00:50:27.520 --> 00:50:34.720
[Courtney] And “my needs.” Like, you know, “a man
has needs.” I have needs. You hear that all the
00:50:34.720 --> 00:50:47.120
time. Needs and rights. And do I actually think
that we can develop proper respect practices under
00:50:47.120 --> 00:50:55.897
the framework of willing and unwilling consent
if we still believe or we still talk about—
00:50:55.897 --> 00:50:55.910
[Royce] Needs.
00:50:55.910 --> 00:51:01.600
[Courtney] Sex being a fundamental human
need or people having a right to have sex,
00:51:01.600 --> 00:51:03.920
or maybe you don’t inherently have a right to sex,
00:51:03.920 --> 00:51:09.520
but maybe you have a right to sex if you’re
in a relationship. We need to talk about
00:51:09.520 --> 00:51:17.280
that. There is a very real conversation about
individual one-on-one interpersonal situations,
00:51:17.280 --> 00:51:22.920
about what a healthy type of consent looks like
when you get to that situation in the moment.
00:51:22.920 --> 00:51:32.640
[Courtney] But as we’ve seen, it is a much broader
issue than that. And I don’t foresee this concept
00:51:32.640 --> 00:51:41.120
of unwilling consent becoming less common
unless we can actually identify the problems
00:51:41.120 --> 00:51:48.400
in how society views these things. And yes,
people do talk about sex as a need, not a want.
00:51:48.400 --> 00:51:56.400
[Courtney] A basic human right, not something
that you can gain access to with a proper
00:51:56.400 --> 00:52:03.440
respect practice and trust you have gained
from other people. And those are the things
00:52:03.440 --> 00:52:11.120
that far too often get removed from the
conversations of consent on the whole. So
00:52:11.120 --> 00:52:16.720
please tune in next week for our 4th and
final installment of our Consent Month
00:52:16.720 --> 00:52:22.000
series. It will be the end of the month as
we are diving into this topic, but it will
00:52:22.000 --> 00:52:28.680
not be the end of the conversation, period.
Because as we all know, consent is ongoing.
00:52:28.680 --> 00:52:33.360
[Courtney] But as for today, I am going
to leave you all off as usual with our
00:52:33.360 --> 00:52:39.840
featured Marketplace vendor of the week,
LauravianArt. LauravianArt is a freelance
00:52:39.840 --> 00:52:44.480
illustrator from the Netherlands
creating original linocut prints,
00:52:44.480 --> 00:52:48.960
prints, stickers, keychains, and more,
often with a queer theme to them.
00:52:48.960 --> 00:52:54.240
[Courtney] And there are lots of very, very
fun things here. I know how many of you in
00:52:54.240 --> 00:53:01.400
the audience are massive fans of Project
Hail Mary, and as of recently, we are too.
00:53:01.400 --> 00:53:06.800
[Courtney] You can find some very, very
good stickers here. I was so tempted to
00:53:06.800 --> 00:53:10.160
get this sticker myself when I saw it
pop up in the shop, and I still might,
00:53:10.160 --> 00:53:16.560
to be honest. But there’s an adorable
little piece of art here with Grace
00:53:16.560 --> 00:53:21.320
hugging Rocky’s little, like, ball,
and it says, Grace Rocky saves stars.
00:53:21.320 --> 00:53:26.320
[Courtney] I know we also have a lot of Our
Flag Means Death fans in the audience. It’s
00:53:26.320 --> 00:53:30.800
been a while since we’ve talked about that one,
but there is some really good Our Flag Means
00:53:30.800 --> 00:53:36.560
Death art. Also Life is Strange. We’ve talked
about Life is Strange a number of times here,
00:53:36.560 --> 00:53:45.440
but there’s a very good Max and Chloe print, and
it’s even got Sean and Daniel on the flip side.
00:53:45.440 --> 00:53:54.120
Or you can do what I did and purchase a PDF
sewing pattern for a medieval jester collar.
00:53:54.120 --> 00:53:59.600
[Courtney] This thing looks so cool,
and I’m very excited to try it out.
00:53:59.600 --> 00:54:06.000
Um, all the photos in the reviews of
other people who have made their own
00:54:06.000 --> 00:54:12.400
jester collar based on these patterns are
absolutely phenomenal. I love it so much.
00:54:12.400 --> 00:54:19.120
[Courtney] Perfect for any ren faire goers
or people who just like sewing silly little
00:54:19.120 --> 00:54:28.000
costumes. So obviously enormous variety of
things on this shop. So please do check out
00:54:28.000 --> 00:54:33.280
our vendor LauravianArt. Links as always are
going to be in the show notes on our website
00:54:33.280 --> 00:54:39.680
as well as the description box. If you are
listening to us on YouTube. So as always,
00:54:39.680 --> 00:54:43.520
thank you all so much for being here,
and we will talk to you all next time.
