In a quandary:

[altyronsmaker]

re: consent vs. responsibility

Now, wait, stop the kneejerk, red-flag response (if you're having one).

First off: I've only been in one situation that has risen my red-flag of possible sexual assault and/or abuse.

Comments

[woman_of_]

Ummm! Well, reminds me of an incident with a 'friend' in the 70's. She was from Canada and was here because her boyfriend there was in jail for drug possession/dealing. Now she was always looking for drugs.

Anyway, we went to a concert. Before the concert we went to a bar and had a couple of drinks. This girl then found some guys (about four), who said they had drugs, and offered to take her, in their van, to somewhere they could take them. My warning bells were ringing. While I wanted to get out of there fast, she was intent on going with them.

Anyway, I went as well, even thought the guys made it clear they didn't want me there. I so was not reassured by that.

I made a bit of a fuss in the van, and they dumped us 'somewhere', neither of us knew where, in Glasgow. Now, yes, it might've just been drugs that they wanted to give my friend.....but I was uncomfortable and made it clear that I wanted to protect my friend. Was that wrong, despite the fact she was clearly consenting?

[piratepurple]

I think 'participation' is kind of nebulous. And there are ways of coercing certain kinds of participation. I think it depends largely on the situation.

Not everyone is raised the way you were, either. You have tools, albeit emotional ones, that not everyone is equipped with.

The difference would be the intent of the other party/parties. In your case, the people you were with obviously thought you were capable of consent, and were operating on that assumption. There *are* people, out there in the world, who use alcohol or drugs to lower the inhibitions of people who would not otherwise consent - on purpose. I think even if the target were to participate under those circumstances, the party with the intent is still wrong.

That's by far not the only extenuating circumstance I can think of, but is just close to what you described.

Does that make sense?

[sevendeadlyfun]

Yes, this is a form of victim blaming. Just because the specifics of a situations wouldn't have felt threatening or intimidating to you doesn't mean the situation is not threatening or intimidating. Coercion and intimidation are not always -I would say seldom are they- obvious. Sometimes simply the presence of a person in a particular space can be intimidating. I'll refer you here to schrodinger's rapist by starling for more examples of that. But lack of a weapon or verbalized threat does not mean the assailant isn't engaging in coercive or intimidating behavior

[altyronsmaker]

Actually, it wasn't in reference to a con thing - or it might have been vaguely. There was a discussion about implied consent on one of my flist's journals, and I just got to thinking about it. (that discussion was related to, but not directly about, the con thing. I really don't know anything about that situation, so I can't speak to it.)

I have to say as both a victim of assault and a victim advocate, I find this idea incredibly upsetting. Being forced or coerced or intimidated into participating in one's own assault is traumatic enough. Being told that saying no doesn't outweigh the participation is revictimizing. Wait. Confused, here. What idea are you refering to

[sevendeadlyfun]

Wait. Confused, here. What idea are you refering to?

The idea you're promulgating that consent is a tricky thing. It's not. You say there are gray areas and I'm saying no there aren't. If there's any uncertainty about whether a person can or has consented, then the default is no. If you can't be certain that a person has or can consent AND you proceed? Yes, you are guilty of sexual assault.

To quote Shakesville's post on what a rape culture looks like: Rape culture is the insistence on trying to distinguish between different kinds of rape via the use of terms like "gray rape" or "date rape." So the notion that consent is tricky? That anything but an enthusiastic and repeated denial is as good as consent? Is part and parcel of the rape culture that we live in.

There's no gray area. Consent should be enthusiastic and vocal. "I don't know" isn't consent. Simply stripping off my clothes (without accompanying verbal consent) doesn't mean I'm consenting to sex. I may not even really consent to stripping off my clothes, but I feel

[altyronsmaker]

The idea you're promulgating that consent is a tricky thing. It's not.I'm not promulgating it. I was interrogating it. I even say, "this is my question." I DON'T know what the protocal is, because consent has never, other than the incident I related above, been an issue for me. So I wanted to know, is my thinking correct here? Is this what everyone is up in arms about? EDUCATE ME. That was the purpose of my post. I certainly was NOT espousing a hard held opinion or fundamental understanding of the subject. By no means. I just dn't have enough experience with it

[angelicvampyre]

First off *hugs* as a victim myself this was a hard read, I feel that I have "gotten over" the act and I sayit like that because that is how other people refer to it, more that I have moved on. He was my boyfriend at the time and he got me drunk knowing that it would lower my gaurd and we would FINALLY make it into the bedroom. This is what happened I don't remember it and I hated him because of it, we are not longer in contact. Being drunk is a fine line in some ways. I mean everyone also at the party I was at said that they felt I was in full knowledge of what I was doing, I was not. In fact it took days for me to put all the events together in my head after the fact and like you I confronted him he however felt he had done nothing wrong and that was that. Consent is a tricky thing which is sad because now with certain legal drugs and drink something that seems to be consent may in fact not be.