Nullified and there is no court

What is the culture of consent and how it works

The text is written in collaboration with Sofia SP

For a month now, everyone has been discussing the second season of one of the most popular series of last year - Sex Education (“sex education” in Russian localization). This is a series in which the conversation about sex is carried out as specifically and, most importantly, the questions are asked and the adolescents answer them. This avoids mentor intonation: sex here is presented as another way of communication, and therefore the solution of sexual problems is not about some secret super equipment, but about overcoming shame in a conversation with a partner. Heroes constantly ask: “Are you ready for this?”, “Is everything okay?”, “So do you like it?” And they also ask again (which sometimes becomes the subject of awkward jokes). And - Hurray! - In the series, there is no sexual violence, none of the heroes becomes a rapist - apparently, because, despite many other problems related to sexism and homophobia, sex loser works.

In Russia, for children and adolescents, there are practically no sex education, but sex and problems of sexual violence in recent years have begun to be discussed more openly. In a conversation about violence, many of us have already learned to shift the focus of attention from the victims of the culprits: yes, in violence - intentionally or not - only the rapist is always to blame. But is it possible to make the rapists less? How do people even become rapists?

In judicial practice, there are frequent cases when the accused of rape did not deny the charges, but did not realize their own actions as violence. It seems that it is important not only to shift the focus, but also to direct it into the past - until everything happened. And here, of course, the conversation about education and the cultural norms in which each person lives and makes decisions is included. To prevent violence, another culture is necessary - the culture of consent.

In a broad sense, the culture of consent is a kind of ethical coordinate system in which each person is autonomous and we, respecting this autonomy, cannot decide for another what he or it actually wants (how they cannot solve it for us). In sex, the principles of consent are built on the fact that any interaction occurs according to the mutual and conscious “yes”. It is important to shift the focus here.

Consent is about the responsibility to ask a question, and not about the expectation of a reaction to your actions

Unfortunately, now our most common principles of communication in sex are working to consolidate the culture of violence, which is customary to contrast the culture of consent.

The principles of culture of violence

You initiate sex, and the responsibility for its termination lies on another person (everyone can say no, so you can not ask anything).

This leads to the fact that if the rape has occurred, the company and the court again focus on the actions of the injured side: did she do anything so that sex stops? Did you do enough? Isn't it to blame?

No, it does not always mean no, but it may mean yes.

Silence is a sign of consent.

If a person recalls his initial consent, this can be ignored (guilt for “conflicting signals” also lies on it).

The condition of the victim of violence (alcohol intoxication, affect, stupor and other conditions that interfere with a clear refusal) is a mitigating factor for the rapist in the eyes of the public: it did not refuse him, which means that he could not know that he was doing something wrong.

The principles of culture of consent

Before initiating sex, you receive a conscious consent from another person (before taking any actions affecting the personal boundaries of another person, we must find out what he wants).

This leads to the fact that if the rape has occurred, the company and the court focus on the actions of the accused: did he do anything to make sure that the other person was agreeing? Was it convinced that the other person was able to give consent?

No means no, the absence, too, means no (not everyone can say no themselves, one of the most common reactions to violence is a stupor, fading).

Consent can always be withdrawn (a person changed his mind, crossed, feel bad and a million more reasons), and no one is obliged to justify himself for this.

The condition of the side affected by violence (alcohol intoxication, unconscious state, affect, stupor and other conditions that interfere with a clear refusal) is in the eyes of the public an aggravating factor for the rapist: it could not give it a conscious agreement, which means that he committed a crime.

It turns out that the culture of consent warns violence: no one will have time to do anything bad, because before doing something to do, you will ask a partner. And only “yes” in this case will mean “yes”.

"You want sex to die!"

When we are talking about these principles in the Russian -speaking space, the conversation often begins to develop according to the same schemes from which we, the authors of the text, be honest, are already tired: “Maybe then we will certify the consent of the notary? Well, let's now still develop the application for this, you want sex to die, so that spontaneous passion and romance disappear from the face of the earth. This is the society of the new Puritanism! "

For example, the famous artist Duran recently painted a comic book that ridicules verbal consent, taking as a basis the real history of rape. In the comic book, a photographer and model during the nu photosessia decide to have sex and use an application for this, in which consent to each new action is certified by SSMES. At the end of the comic book, riot police arrives at the couple (“You grabbed my hair, and this requires a separate SSMES!”). The comic here is built on bringing the principles of consent to the absurdity. So the culture, necessary in order to prevent violence, is distorted in the public consciousness, turning into a “punitive” and violent.

Illustration: Maya Pak for TD

In such distortions, it is overlooked that consent to sex is not only about attempts to change legal norms and regulations that in our country, by the way, there is no and is not yet expected. The culture of consent is primarily about the ethics of communication and any interaction. Everyone needs a conversation about consent, including those who do not always understand what can be considered violence and what is not. It is assumed that people, in fact, are not so bad: we want to show attention to the well-being of another person and we have no goal to cause harm.

That is why in a conversation about the culture of consent, we would like to get away from the opposition of the “rapist - victim” and move along the time of time at the moment where nothing had happened: no one has yet committed violence and no one has suffered from it. How exactly do we formulate our desires in relation to another person? How do we make it clear that we would like to have sex with him/her? How do we move from words to deed or from business to words? What are the options?

Ask or suggest

In 2007, an important discussion unfolded on the English -language Internet about what ASK Culture (“Culture of Asking”) and Guess Culture (“Culture of Assumptions, Assumptions”) were unfolded: Forum users, trying to solve the problem of an anonymous participant, found out how these types of cultures are different from each other and how they work in different situations.

The problem was as follows: in a two -room apartment in which the initiator of the discussion lived with his wife, asked to stay a familiar wife for a couple of weeks. The request of a friend was formulated as the question: “Can you live with you? I will travel on business, so I will not be absent from morning to evening and come only at night. ” The husband did not want a friend to stop at them, since it would be uncomfortable to live in a small space with a stranger. He perceived the question of his acquaintance as aggression, manipulation and imperative, because he suggested that she was not ready for refusal and that only an affirmative answer was possible to this question on the part of the owners of the apartment.

Among the thousands of the tips “just say no, this is your right” was a comment by the user Andrea Donderi, who problematized this conversation differently: “We have a classic case when the culture of asking is faced with the culture of assumption. The “ask” culture implies that you can ask anything (as a friend who asked to stay) and fully realize that you can always get an answer. In the “assumption” culture, you avoid directly formulating your request, if you are not sure that the answer will be yes, and do not expect this from others (as the author of the post). ” That is, in a situation where the answer of another person is unknown to us, we can interpret his words and actions as a hint and try to hint by himself. So the distortion of any signal works: for example, very often people take politeness and goodwill for flirting and are disappointed when it turns out that reality does not correspond to their expectations.

This case became an impulse for the emergence of many texts, where the difference between the “asker” and “Hessera” was examined in detail. As it turned out, people often project their type of communication on others: asker thinks they speak with asker, and the gessers - with the gessers. The first are sure that if the other person wanted to do something from them, he would ask about it (and they are ready to ask). The latter think that the other will not tell them directly, so you need to find a hint in his actions, guess (and give hints themselves). These models have a different status of refusal: the culture of asking, having received a refusal, we, of course, can be upset, but when we asked a question, we were ready for such a development of events. In the culture of assumptions, the refusal may look unexpected and aggressive: it seemed to us that a person gave us signals, we interpreted them as consent and now it seems to us that he changed his mind (and a person, seeing our reaction, could begin to feel guilty for his refusal).

Due to the taboo direct conversation about sex (embarrassing, awkwardly, indecent and so on), sexual communication is often by default inside the assumption culture. People are mistaken, see what is not, they blame others in this - and yes, they are not so rarely committed by bad deeds. So the assumption makes its contribution to the culture of violence, which, according to various sources, suffer, mainly women.

In combination with gender stereotypes, the culture of assumption is especially dangerous. Multiples and women are prescribed by different behavior. “Correct” female sexuality is defined as passive, and any other model is condemned. It turns out that women are afraid to speak directly, what they want, while their desires suggest them.

“Correct” male sexuality is characterized as active, that is, the initiative should come from a man. So there is a distortion “no means yes”: while a woman cannot get together for a direct refusal, a man interprets her reaction as a hint that she needs to continue to achieve her, and even if she was able to say no, this refusal is perceived as a motivation for more decisive action (however, such situations can occur between people of any gender).

What can you agree on

Obviously, the transition from assumptions to questions can help avoid incorrect interpretations, mutual disappointments and even violence. But many people are afraid that due to constant pronunciation, sex will turn into a tedious bureaucratic procedure, and any experiments will be banned. In fact, many sexual practices, which are considered bold and certainly not Puritan, are built precisely on verbal agreements and active harmony.

By the way, it is possible to agree in different forms in different ways: someone needs a question to be asked every time, someone agrees that sex can begin suddenly and without any questions (and this also corresponds to the principles of consent culture).

For example, in the BDSM culture, participants in what is happening in advance in advance in detail the boundaries of the permitted and agree on what they agree to and what is not. If we practice Dirty Talk and Secosting, then we specify in advance with the partner what words to him/she are pleasant and which is not, in what situations correspondence is possible, and in which it is not. If we talk about role -playing games, then many of them are built to the smallest detail in advance (almost with scenario plans and replicas).

Read also Everything that concerns the hologram, robots, chips for orgasms, sex prostheses are the most technological sex that we were waiting for

But even if we mean the most ordinary sex, the culture of consent and asking can significantly improve your sensations and the feeling of a partner. Here you can recall the scene from the first season of the same series Sex Education: the girl Amy realizes that she had never experienced an orgasm and pretended all the time, because no one had ever asked her what she wanted. When her new guy asked about it - “Do you definitely want this? What do you like? " - She was confused. But this question helped her to know herself and her body better, and then directly formulate her desires.

While we are still living in a world in which at one form or another, violence and culture of violence are normalized and rationalized in one form or another - in personal life, in the family, at work, in our interactions with law enforcement agencies. To resist this, it is necessary to build an alternative culture - the culture of consent and follow its principles in all areas of our lives. If we perceive active consent as a norm, we will stop silently tolete a violation of our borders, whether it is an intrusive invasion of relatives or uninvited health advice. And we will cease to feverishly interpret other people's actions, tormenting from the unknown and offending - now we can simply ask.

Psychology Sexual Education Ethics Ethics of Relations