Follow us on social media! Twitter - @staffsunion Instagram - @staffsunion Facebook - Staffordshire University Students Union Tiktok - @staffsunion www.staffsunion.com
ye, yes is not an yes. so someone can say yes to make someone comfortable without actually wanting to. that's stupid. say no if your not interested. youre only adding to the hurt by saying yes and then no
i suspect you were distracted by something/someone else around 1:20 and i respectfully suggest you rewatch that bit of the video and fully engage with it
@@tylerlogan7530 learning about consent has nothing to do with experience and it's a good thing to start your sexual activity understanding the complexities of consent, if that were the case for everyone then "virgins" would be a lot more protected from sexual misconduct.
I'm surprised that somebody didn't provide this response to the tea video earlier. Obviously, the tea video has been helpful as it has sparked conversation about consent beyond just the original "no means no" message. Other things also mean "no". The message that you have complete sovereignty over your body is crucial.
I just saw this video in a therapy group this week. Excellent points to bring up which while missing from the "tea" video were also discussed in the group. Also, something to remember is that the statutory age of consent is not static from place to place. Some may have it set for 16, while others may be set at 18, and some may have different standards if both parties are under a certain age but within reason of each other's age. Still another consideration is that if both parties are "FRIES" you need to think of what the "Package" is. Ie, what environment are they in? School? Employment? Church? Sports team? If any person is in a position of authority over another person with whom they are having a otherwise FRIES relationship with, there are still ethical boundaries that could cause the relationship to be non-consentual for the subordinate even if they would be outside of the "box" their FRIES came in. But that was discussed in the group as well. Thank you for putting this together, very well done.
I have a lot of respect for this video, I am glad it exists. I made a similar video once for Brighton Council Child Protection Services as a personal narrative of a parent of a disabled child with mental health issues to teach staff a personal story to give an example of when services can go wrong. I happen to also studied for a PhD researching trauma, and the phenomenological experiences that can go with it. But I needed this video, as years later I was then on the receiving end of a psychologically manipulative hate crime, and two years down the road my body still (for example) bucks out when i meditate and other trauma I still carry in my body. I needed this video today because I already knew the rules and needed reminding on a bad day that they still exist. This video is very good at explaining simply what I can guarantee is spot on. Much respect to the confidence of the woman who presents this.
I'm going to nod, and say, "yeah, maybe someone will say "its interesting that Staffordshire U-SU made this eloquent and informative media", as opposed to Sussex, but, I am not that crass, (haaaah, ok, I am that crass), however, I can see this being made by people in Hereford/Worcestershire as well, the basic message remains the same. Anyhow, I hope you recover from that.
As a person who was coerced and a minor, and with a friend who was under the influence and a minor, I took the “yes is consent” as “when it’s given genuinely, without pressure, convincing, and by someone in a state of mental stability and rationality, then it is consent”, and the “unconscious” person as anyone mentally unstable or irrational, anyone under the influence, anyone too young, anyone physically disabled, anyone sleeping, anyone trading sex in exchange for being pulled out of an unfortunate situation (someone abducted, broke, homeless, stalked, etc), and of course anyone who is unconscious
"[A]nyone physically disabled," Physically disabled people often do want sex but FRIES needs to be adhered to. Even mentally disabled people can have sex and should not be restricted from what they genuinely want. Otherwise that would be infantilizing every kind of disabled adults. We are not children.
Re-writing tea.. If you offer someone tea, and they say yes, make them tea. If you offer someone tea, and they say no, do not make them tea. Please note that some will say yes out of fear that they’ll miss out, or get scolded. If someone says I don’t know, you can make them tea or not. Please note that if you make tea, they might not drink it. Do not force someone to have tea. Consent is EVERYTHING. There is caffeine in tea, so anyone under the age 18 cannot have tea. If someone is under the influence of drugs, they are not in a good state to have tea. If someone has a disability,they are not in the state to have tea. Do not add ice cubes in tea to only take them out later. No one is your slave. Do not make others drink tea.
If someone says *"yes out of fear that they’ll miss out, or get scolded"*, they are still legally responsible for that yes. As an adult you are responsible for your agreements regardless of how you feel. If you feel social pressure to get a nose job procedure because you'll miss out or get scolded, you still legally consented to procedure when you agree to it.
Consent- it's not easy as Consent - it's not easy as tea You and the original video talked about the problems by the point of view of who has to decide but not who propose.
"Emotional, or psychological pressure, and abuse" is not legally factual. The only "coercion" the law recognizes is threats or blackmail. You are fully responsible for your "yes". Otherwise a pushy car salesman would be charged with robbery when you agree to buy the car. Or a beggar on the street telling a sob story would be charged with robbery for guilt tripping for money. As people can withdraw consent at anytime, it also follows that people can reinstate consent at anytime with a "yes".
This is why we need to get back to teaching responsibility. People seem to have fault and responsibility all mixed up. They really shouldn't, that mistake could be fatal. Is it our FAULT that the car salesman is pushy and might try to manipulate us into spending more than we actually wanted to? That is, he's COERCING us into buying something we don't actually want? No, of course not. It's not our fault. However, as the person who chose to be at the car dealership and potentially expose myself to such a person, it is nevertheless my RESPONSIBILITY to ensure that I know how people like this behave and might take advantage of me. I'd even say that my mentors, parents, friends, etc have some partial responsibility in ensuring I'm taught how to handle myself around the pushy salesman. Should the car stop at the stop sign so you can cross the road? YES. If they hit you will it be their fault? YES. Is it still your responsibility to look both ways? YES. And on and on it goes. Life is full of responsibility that we must engage in for things that may or may not be our fault. And there's many many many "shoulds" that people ought to be doing out there and yet, they will not. So it's best to know how to be responsible for one's own self.
Great video to complete the message from the popular tea consent video! Interesting how we can coherently apply all the same arguments to see how problematic our governments are: they coerce, they expect consent given once (e.g. at an election) to be valid for years, etc. Real democracy means being free from coercion and able to retract our consent at any time!💚
As a mid-40s person this kind of video scares but reassures me. It's a tough world out there, let's not be mean-shits to people for no valid reason, let's not let mean-shits do things to people without their express permission, and maybe let's all stand with the person to our left and right and keep an eye wider than that to help those under the influence of the aforementioned mean-shits. I hope the conversations keep happening and all of us use our voices with good purpose. and it's on just gone 7am, where are my kitten videos
Is consent enough? I mean, the tea video is good and covers important stuff, but what I think a lot of the discussion about consent misses, including this video, is that mere 'consent' just seems like too low a bar to be aiming for. To my ear, 'consent' is broad enough to include 'oh, go on then" and the like. I think about when else we talk about consent, and medical procedures come to mind. "Yes, I give consent to undergo this procedure, but man I wish I didn't have to go through with it". I feel like when teaching about consent we should be telling people consent is just a step along the path - what you should really be looking for is *enthusiasm*.
Yeah, when things go right for us we assume that it's of our making. My thought out, deliberate actions and the correct assessment of others keeps me from making mistakes. But yet, when you think about it, you're just a fraction from disaster the same as anyone else.
I think this is better than the "healthy boundary pushing versus toxic boundary pushing" video I just saw. But it has similar limitations and I have concerns because the final section of affirming bodily autonomy puts the onus back on saying no rather than responsible caution of anyone pushing for sex or making other requests to make good requests. Disabled adults must have their capacity to consent to sex and relationships supported and respected. Balanced affirmation is required there, as well as saying you can't always tell for example who is autistic or dealing with selective mutism, trauma, anxiety or extreme rejection sensitivity. So non categorical and responsible sensitivity is required to find out enough about people to know. Also there's nuances to enthusiasm and fresh consent - some kinds of say solicitous touching might be ok with an established partner whilst not with a member of the public in the street and the law I think has room for that nuance though it should always be revokable. Similarly whilst enthusiasm is a good rule of thumb, especially the less intimacy and trust there is developed, it can be missing whilst there is true consent say during attempts to get pregnant or say an asexual or lower libido partner may consent but not want to call it enthusiastic. I liked the Robot Hugs webcomic. Though despite all that pro-consent and sex positive attitude I'm not sure that some requests like for nude photos can ever be made in good faith. I think they're always more risky red flags than risqué without judgment or blame. Risk management is an important part of the process.It's essentially a sensitive high risk act, required ongoing feedback, trust and consent, with potentially big payoffs: like gymnastics, circus skills, cheerleading, dance and figure skating holds and tumbling.
So, one note on the topic of drugs and alcohol: To me, the waters get really muddy when both participants are so intoxicated that they do not have the capacity to consent, but both of them appear to want it during the act. Would one person be justified in accusing the other of assault in that situation? I am deliberately not specifying genders, because not all intercourse happens between people on opposite, binary sides of the gender spectrum and you do not need to be male to be a perpetrator, nor do you need to be female to be a victim. It's just a very specific hypothetical that my neurodivergent brain is curious about.
Consider. If one party were to accuse the other of assault, they could argue innocence by virtue of incapacitation. At least, in the US. Basically, if you are not capable of making rational decisions due to mental health or substance influence, then you are innocent. It's the same principle that underlies being incapable of consent: you are not capable of making rational decisions while intoxicated.
@@FractalFeline ah, that is very different here. A severe impairment like psychosis might exonorate someone, but if someone commits a crime after taking alcohol or other substances, that can actually increase your punishment, because you chose to drink or take drugs. But our legal system is pretty good at recognizing nuance in cases like my hypothetical.
I'm not sure how accurate a reflection of US law this is. If someone kills someone after getting in a vehicle drunk, they are still charged and punished for this behavior (i.e., they're not innocent). It doesn't matter that you were drunk and not capable of making rational decisions, you still killed someone. It may not be murder (i.e., intention + responsibility), but at least in the driving drunk case, someone would still be responsible for the harm perpetrated while under the influence of drugs/alcohol (i.e., negligent manslaughter (responsibility - intention). Not sure how much this type of reasoning plays out in sexual assault cases in the actual judicial system, but at the very least, we don't give people free passes just because they were intoxicated.
It sounds good, but this isn't real life. It seems rare that there is a conversation when you get home that goes 'so do you want to have sex now' and then they say 'why, yes I do, shall I sign here.'. Communication is not just verbal, and often neither party would want it to be.
Life already has too many forms and overally bureaucratic ritualistic communication to appease the litigious overlords....to take the most sacred human act and make it just as dry and dull sounds AWFUL. I'm so glad I got married 15 years ago. I feel like I caught the last chopper out of 'Nam.
I see how the point about disabled people not being able to fully express consent might be awfully misread (especially with the "deaf" icon used here) and and lead to gatekeeping and discrimination. Even in case of neurodivergent and mentally or intellectuallly disabled people it is a very nuanced theme that deserves a thoughtful analysis on its own.
Consent is the absence of the violation of trust. Anyone's trust. It's not about yes or no, but about the expectations you create and live up to, or not. So be aware of the messages you send out into the world around you. Your mask and attitude may very well be making promises you never intended to keep.
So if a wife is bending over loading the dishwasher and her husband walking by gives her a playful slap on the behind without asking her first, is that sexual assault? (Assume she has never called him out for it before, but perhaps it is a new marriage and he has never done it before.) I think even she would agree that him stopping and asking "Is it OK if I give you a gentle tap on the butt?" beforehand is probably _even creepier_ than just doing it in that case, and not very romantic. (Anticipating the "He should..." responses: Of course he should _consider_ how she might feel about it, but that doesn't mean he is an expert mind-reader, especially since her feelings may change from hour to hour.) Oh yeah and now reverse the genders and see if you come up with the same answer!
JFC if I have to have a "consent" discussion with my wife every time... NO FRIGGON WAY. That isn't how marriages work. Talk about a passionless marriage with as much tedium as IRS statements.
Anything that isn’t a yes, is a no. “Um… I’m not sure.” “Uh… well…” “I mean… maybe?” “I don’t know…” Are all no’s. Also if they SAY yes, but their body language says NO, guess what! It’s a no. I love this video because it gets into detail.
So in theory you're correct, but not in reality. You actually got almost there. You said "if they say yes, but their body language says no..." you're right about this. If they're body language is NO it's definitely a no. But here's the flipside to that. If their words are no and their body language is yes, it's a YES! But people get themselves into trouble because people are getting worse and worse at reading body language...something something too much time on the internet probably. I actually wish it was as simple as this video makes it out to be, but it simply isn't.
The thing I noticed in the tea video was them saying you can make a cup of tea and leave it out for them......what does that mean in relation to consent?
It essentially means that even if you might expect consent - it is not consent. E.g. if you invite someone to come to your house, they agree, they agree to come with you to the kitchen and you start to prepare the tea, they still might decide no to tea and you don't have consent until they agree to the tea. Equally, someone can show you they are interested in tea because they consentingly send you pictures of their teabags. They might even ask to see your teaspoon. However, they then decide that they actually don't want the tea. There is no assumed consent to have tea because of other actions that might lead up to drinking tea.
On the flip side of the reversible nature of consent, you can't withdraw consent after the act you consented to is completed. This should be obvious, but it doesn't stop it from happening, or from being valid in court.
But that's the whole thing of it can be taken away and it can be withdrawn, if I was kinda there but then no longer there guess what? My consent has been revoked and the action stops, that's how it's reversible.
I have a very good and simple solution: no sex until marriage. While getting engaged, you create a clear set of mutually agreed upon rules about sex that take effect after marriage.
Coercion is not consent? Well of course not. It's an attempt to get someone to do something. Saying yes as a result of Coercion? That is not consent either?
Good video, but again here the responsibility is put upon the person saying "yes". The point of the tea video is teaching about the person _serving_ the tea, and how to properly act as "host". Maybe FRIES need to be offered along with the tea.
I'm currently considering how to apply these rules to the killing of unborn children in the womb. If the unborn child does not consent to be aborted because it cannot yet speak, is an abortion then murder?
@@vulpinemachine - Thanks for your opinion! It is interesting that no one else answered during the last 3 weeks. Maybe, because they are afraid to expose themselfes as hypocrites 🙂 :-)
I like what you have done. Great job. I would add that people who are in authority positions over others create a power imbalance and the other person may not feel they have the right or ability to say no. Also, those with a history of trauma may not have the ability to say no and don't feel they have the right to anything but consent. This gets really tricky for a lot of people.
Definitely. They lay it out like it's super duper clear. Except, not everyone, ESPECIALLLY women, follow these "super duper clear rules." In fact, my buddy recently was being threatened by a girl because he DID NOT sleep with her. She was threatening that she would go to the police with and accusation of gRape. If reality was ACTUALLY like these videos, it would be easy to understand, but it's not like these videos no matter how much they try to say it is.
Christ, a lot of these issues would be resolved if people weren't so promiscuous, stupid and indulging enough to get batshit drunk to pass out or to be so drunk to barely be able to understand each other to begin with.
you are part of the problem, re-evaluate your stance regarding what you think of as an "acceptable level of xxxxx" with promiscuety as the xxxx in this case, from my, and many others viewpoint, you are trying to absolve things like rape due to "oh, we were drunk" when, actually, its rape; "stupid" its still rape. "induging" "hi, rape again". "whatever other bullshit excuse you dream up" is, irl, not an excuse to take advantage of, and use, another person for sexual, or otherwise, gratification. if you disagree, its actually not my problem, but it is a problem for anyone around you. what steps they decide to take, may be Your problem.
@@staberind Doesn't matter if it's an excuse or not, it's gonna happen more frequently because people are horny, people abuse power and drunkeness makes you weaker and lowers both sides ability to take decisive action and know what they are doing.
@@ActionableFreedom more frequently than when? the history of homo sapiens sapiens is the history of nonconsentual sex. its also nott a "both sides" thing, its an agressor and a victim thing, you are trying to shift the onus of responsibility from one party to the other, thats kind of deplorable, I'd step back from this and do a little introspection.
There is no crime more heinous than **** which is why consent is so important. It's not as simple as tea, but it's still pretty simple. You do not have sexual consent if she (or they): a) explicitly says no b) says nothing c) weakly acquiesces d) is inebriated e) if you're inebriated f) is in an emotionally vulnerable state g) is being financially coerced h) lacks understanding about how sex and birth control work i) lacks enthusiasm j) doesn't like how you look naked k) regrets having sex with you I'm probably
No crime more heinous than... **? Also how are you listing *regret* among the others. You cannot hold others responsible for you making bad *choices* you later regret.
No crime more heinous than... **? Also how are you listing *regret* among the others. You cannot hold others responsible for you making bad *choices* you later regret.
lol. k is the best one since you'd need to be a mind reader of someone's future mind in order to ever receive consent then. i'm a dude and i have a few regrets, does that mean i've been r.@.p.3.d.?
@@phoenixfire8226 yes. Congratulations! Unfortunately our work as feminists is not done yet, so you as a man still cannot extort the people who made you a victim unless you transition your gender. I dream of a day when people of EVERY gender have the freedom to frivolously destroy the lives of other people through r*p* accusations. I hope you share my dream.
Except if you coerce someone into saying "yes" or that person is incapacitated while saying "yes" or that person is not fully informed about what they are saying "yes" to, then it's not consent.
I was coherced into sex by my first girlfriend. We were both 12. I did say 'yes', but it was a weary, 'fine whatever just get it over with' sort of yes. She had asked me about 100 times to do sexual stuff, she wore me down. It wasn't her fault as she had been abused and thought this was normal, and she probably didn't realise what she was doing was psychologically wearing me down, but no she didn't 'tie me up' but it was just as damaging because I felt like I had no choice, if I didn't do it she would be mad or leave me and I liked her.
Oh well, but if you don’t have sex before marriage, you kind of cannot even hypothetically come to the point where consent almost has to be certified in writing…
Ohhh..... but what if the opinions of the followers of weird modern cults don't actually change the fact that your esoteric view, among many other esoteric viewpoints, of the present status of "marriage"* is absoutely meaningless? *subject to change, like the rest of reality.
@@maria24thst I hope you're not saying that consent in marriage should work ANYTHING like this video because I guarantee you this low-trust, verify everything, IRS level scrutiny is a surefire way to destroy all passion inside a marriage. Anyone who has a good marriage does not practice consent in the way this video suggests consent should operate. There's still consent, it just doesn't work this way AT ALL.
I like the tea video as an introduction especially for young people but this is more nuanced, well done.
ye, yes is not an yes. so someone can say yes to make someone comfortable without actually wanting to. that's stupid. say no if your not interested. youre only adding to the hurt by saying yes and then no
i suspect you were distracted by something/someone else around 1:20 and i respectfully suggest you rewatch that bit of the video and fully engage with it
Getting sex advice from a mega virgin is crazy but that's just me
@@tylerlogan7530 learning about consent has nothing to do with experience and it's a good thing to start your sexual activity understanding the complexities of consent, if that were the case for everyone then "virgins" would be a lot more protected from sexual misconduct.
I'm surprised that somebody didn't provide this response to the tea video earlier. Obviously, the tea video has been helpful as it has sparked conversation about consent beyond just the original "no means no" message. Other things also mean "no". The message that you have complete sovereignty over your body is crucial.
I just saw this video in a therapy group this week. Excellent points to bring up which while missing from the "tea" video were also discussed in the group. Also, something to remember is that the statutory age of consent is not static from place to place. Some may have it set for 16, while others may be set at 18, and some may have different standards if both parties are under a certain age but within reason of each other's age.
Still another consideration is that if both parties are "FRIES" you need to think of what the "Package" is. Ie, what environment are they in? School? Employment? Church? Sports team? If any person is in a position of authority over another person with whom they are having a otherwise FRIES relationship with, there are still ethical boundaries that could cause the relationship to be non-consentual for the subordinate even if they would be outside of the "box" their FRIES came in.
But that was discussed in the group as well.
Thank you for putting this together, very well done.
British: Consent is like tea
Americans: no it's like fries!
Me: its fries with tea 👌
i'm pretty sure the person speaking is british too
french fries or freedom fries?
I have a lot of respect for this video, I am glad it exists.
I made a similar video once for Brighton Council Child Protection Services as a personal narrative of a parent of a disabled child with mental health issues to teach staff a personal story to give an example of when services can go wrong.
I happen to also studied for a PhD researching trauma, and the phenomenological experiences that can go with it.
But I needed this video, as years later I was then on the receiving end of a psychologically manipulative hate crime, and two years down the road my body still (for example) bucks out when i meditate and other trauma I still carry in my body.
I needed this video today because I already knew the rules and needed reminding on a bad day that they still exist. This video is very good at explaining simply what I can guarantee is spot on.
Much respect to the confidence of the woman who presents this.
I'm going to nod, and say, "yeah, maybe someone will say "its interesting that Staffordshire U-SU made this eloquent and informative media", as opposed to Sussex, but, I am not that crass, (haaaah, ok, I am that crass), however, I can see this being made by people in Hereford/Worcestershire as well, the basic message remains the same. Anyhow, I hope you recover from that.
This is excellent, I'll be sharing this with my students. Thanks for taking the time to make this.
As a person who was coerced and a minor, and with a friend who was under the influence and a minor, I took the “yes is consent” as “when it’s given genuinely, without pressure, convincing, and by someone in a state of mental stability and rationality, then it is consent”, and the “unconscious” person as anyone mentally unstable or irrational, anyone under the influence, anyone too young, anyone physically disabled, anyone sleeping, anyone trading sex in exchange for being pulled out of an unfortunate situation (someone abducted, broke, homeless, stalked, etc), and of course anyone who is unconscious
"[A]nyone physically disabled," Physically disabled people often do want sex but FRIES needs to be adhered to. Even mentally disabled people can have sex and should not be restricted from what they genuinely want. Otherwise that would be infantilizing every kind of disabled adults. We are not children.
This is great. Thank you for making this.
Excellent follow-up to the tea video! And thanks youtube for suggesting it! Well done SUSU!
Re-writing tea..
If you offer someone tea, and they say yes, make them tea.
If you offer someone tea, and they say no, do not make them tea.
Please note that some will say yes out of fear that they’ll miss out, or get scolded.
If someone says I don’t know, you can make them tea or not. Please note that if you make tea, they might not drink it.
Do not force someone to have tea. Consent is EVERYTHING.
There is caffeine in tea, so anyone under the age 18 cannot have tea.
If someone is under the influence of drugs, they are not in a good state to have tea.
If someone has a disability,they are not in the state to have tea.
Do not add ice cubes in tea to only take them out later.
No one is your slave. Do not make others drink tea.
Uk consent is 16. Butttt if your over 18 having intercorse with someone under 18 is illegal.
Disability depends, it would be rather rude to refuse someone tea because they are missing an arm
If someone says *"yes out of fear that they’ll miss out, or get scolded"*, they are still legally responsible for that yes. As an adult you are responsible for your agreements regardless of how you feel. If you feel social pressure to get a nose job procedure because you'll miss out or get scolded, you still legally consented to procedure when you agree to it.
Very well done! You present a clear and concise message that is useful far beyond the university setting.
I never heard about the tea video, but it is very interesting. Now this video making it even deeper is very important!
As a Tutor over the years, I wish i knew about this and could have shown this to more people, cheers SUSU.
Consent- it's not easy as Consent - it's not easy as tea
You and the original video talked about the problems by the point of view of who has to decide but not who propose.
This needs to be shown at every school, followed by Bill Burr's bit on the subject "No Doesn't Always Mean No."
Great follow up video!! 🩷 Thank you 🫶
They should remake the tea consent video with these extra details
"Emotional, or psychological pressure, and abuse" is not legally factual. The only "coercion" the law recognizes is threats or blackmail. You are fully responsible for your "yes". Otherwise a pushy car salesman would be charged with robbery when you agree to buy the car. Or a beggar on the street telling a sob story would be charged with robbery for guilt tripping for money.
As people can withdraw consent at anytime, it also follows that people can reinstate consent at anytime with a "yes".
This is why we need to get back to teaching responsibility. People seem to have fault and responsibility all mixed up. They really shouldn't, that mistake could be fatal. Is it our FAULT that the car salesman is pushy and might try to manipulate us into spending more than we actually wanted to? That is, he's COERCING us into buying something we don't actually want? No, of course not. It's not our fault. However, as the person who chose to be at the car dealership and potentially expose myself to such a person, it is nevertheless my RESPONSIBILITY to ensure that I know how people like this behave and might take advantage of me. I'd even say that my mentors, parents, friends, etc have some partial responsibility in ensuring I'm taught how to handle myself around the pushy salesman.
Should the car stop at the stop sign so you can cross the road? YES. If they hit you will it be their fault? YES. Is it still your responsibility to look both ways? YES.
And on and on it goes. Life is full of responsibility that we must engage in for things that may or may not be our fault. And there's many many many "shoulds" that people ought to be doing out there and yet, they will not. So it's best to know how to be responsible for one's own self.
Great video to complete the message from the popular tea consent video! Interesting how we can coherently apply all the same arguments to see how problematic our governments are: they coerce, they expect consent given once (e.g. at an election) to be valid for years, etc. Real democracy means being free from coercion and able to retract our consent at any time!💚
As a mid-40s person this kind of video scares but reassures me. It's a tough world out there, let's not be mean-shits to people for no valid reason, let's not let mean-shits do things to people without their express permission, and maybe let's all stand with the person to our left and right and keep an eye wider than that to help those under the influence of the aforementioned mean-shits.
I hope the conversations keep happening and all of us use our voices with good purpose. and it's on just gone 7am, where are my kitten videos
Is consent enough?
I mean, the tea video is good and covers important stuff, but what I think a lot of the discussion about consent misses, including this video, is that mere 'consent' just seems like too low a bar to be aiming for. To my ear, 'consent' is broad enough to include 'oh, go on then" and the like.
I think about when else we talk about consent, and medical procedures come to mind. "Yes, I give consent to undergo this procedure, but man I wish I didn't have to go through with it".
I feel like when teaching about consent we should be telling people consent is just a step along the path - what you should really be looking for is *enthusiasm*.
Yeah, when things go right for us we assume that it's of our making. My thought out, deliberate actions and the correct assessment of others keeps me from making mistakes. But yet, when you think about it, you're just a fraction from disaster the same as anyone else.
She literally used the word 'enthusiastic'.
Freely given
Reversible
Informed
**Enthusiastic**
Specific
I think this is better than the "healthy boundary pushing versus toxic boundary pushing" video I just saw. But it has similar limitations and I have concerns because the final section of affirming bodily autonomy puts the onus back on saying no rather than responsible caution of anyone pushing for sex or making other requests to make good requests.
Disabled adults must have their capacity to consent to sex and relationships supported and respected. Balanced affirmation is required there, as well as saying you can't always tell for example who is autistic or dealing with selective mutism, trauma, anxiety or extreme rejection sensitivity. So non categorical and responsible sensitivity is required to find out enough about people to know.
Also there's nuances to enthusiasm and fresh consent - some kinds of say solicitous touching might be ok with an established partner whilst not with a member of the public in the street and the law I think has room for that nuance though it should always be revokable. Similarly whilst enthusiasm is a good rule of thumb, especially the less intimacy and trust there is developed, it can be missing whilst there is true consent say during attempts to get pregnant or say an asexual or lower libido partner may consent but not want to call it enthusiastic. I liked the Robot Hugs webcomic.
Though despite all that pro-consent and sex positive attitude I'm not sure that some requests like for nude photos can ever be made in good faith. I think they're always more risky red flags than risqué without judgment or blame. Risk management is an important part of the process.It's essentially a sensitive high risk act, required ongoing feedback, trust and consent, with potentially big payoffs: like gymnastics, circus skills, cheerleading, dance and figure skating holds and tumbling.
what the exact fuck is wrong with you? or are you just spazming a response?
So, one note on the topic of drugs and alcohol: To me, the waters get really muddy when both participants are so intoxicated that they do not have the capacity to consent, but both of them appear to want it during the act. Would one person be justified in accusing the other of assault in that situation?
I am deliberately not specifying genders, because not all intercourse happens between people on opposite, binary sides of the gender spectrum and you do not need to be male to be a perpetrator, nor do you need to be female to be a victim.
It's just a very specific hypothetical that my neurodivergent brain is curious about.
Consider. If one party were to accuse the other of assault, they could argue innocence by virtue of incapacitation. At least, in the US. Basically, if you are not capable of making rational decisions due to mental health or substance influence, then you are innocent. It's the same principle that underlies being incapable of consent: you are not capable of making rational decisions while intoxicated.
@@FractalFeline ah, that is very different here. A severe impairment like psychosis might exonorate someone, but if someone commits a crime after taking alcohol or other substances, that can actually increase your punishment, because you chose to drink or take drugs. But our legal system is pretty good at recognizing nuance in cases like my hypothetical.
I'm not sure how accurate a reflection of US law this is. If someone kills someone after getting in a vehicle drunk, they are still charged and punished for this behavior (i.e., they're not innocent). It doesn't matter that you were drunk and not capable of making rational decisions, you still killed someone. It may not be murder (i.e., intention + responsibility), but at least in the driving drunk case, someone would still be responsible for the harm perpetrated while under the influence of drugs/alcohol (i.e., negligent manslaughter (responsibility - intention). Not sure how much this type of reasoning plays out in sexual assault cases in the actual judicial system, but at the very least, we don't give people free passes just because they were intoxicated.
GREAT MESSEGE!!!! 👏👏👏😲😲
Thank you.
Nice video 🙌
It sounds good, but this isn't real life. It seems rare that there is a conversation when you get home that goes 'so do you want to have sex now' and then they say 'why, yes I do, shall I sign here.'. Communication is not just verbal, and often neither party would want it to be.
Life already has too many forms and overally bureaucratic ritualistic communication to appease the litigious overlords....to take the most sacred human act and make it just as dry and dull sounds AWFUL. I'm so glad I got married 15 years ago. I feel like I caught the last chopper out of 'Nam.
I see how the point about disabled people not being able to fully express consent might be awfully misread (especially with the "deaf" icon used here) and and lead to gatekeeping and discrimination. Even in case of neurodivergent and mentally or intellectuallly disabled people it is a very nuanced theme that deserves a thoughtful analysis on its own.
Hey, Hanna nice to see you :) Thank you for sharing with us essential critical information. Can you please share with us articles links
this is like that school you go to between highschool and college
Wiggle room for regretful behavior
Consent is the absence of the violation of trust. Anyone's trust.
It's not about yes or no, but about the expectations you create and live up to, or not.
So be aware of the messages you send out into the world around you.
Your mask and attitude may very well be making promises you never intended to keep.
3:27 I know this video is about a serious topic, but I need to get this joke out.
"Hey, I said I *didn't* want milk in my tea."
So if a wife is bending over loading the dishwasher and her husband walking by gives her a playful slap on the behind without asking her first, is that sexual assault? (Assume she has never called him out for it before, but perhaps it is a new marriage and he has never done it before.) I think even she would agree that him stopping and asking "Is it OK if I give you a gentle tap on the butt?" beforehand is probably _even creepier_ than just doing it in that case, and not very romantic.
(Anticipating the "He should..." responses: Of course he should _consider_ how she might feel about it, but that doesn't mean he is an expert mind-reader, especially since her feelings may change from hour to hour.) Oh yeah and now reverse the genders and see if you come up with the same answer!
JFC if I have to have a "consent" discussion with my wife every time... NO FRIGGON WAY. That isn't how marriages work. Talk about a passionless marriage with as much tedium as IRS statements.
Anything that isn’t a yes, is a no. “Um… I’m not sure.” “Uh… well…” “I mean… maybe?” “I don’t know…” Are all no’s.
Also if they SAY yes, but their body language says NO, guess what! It’s a no.
I love this video because it gets into detail.
So in theory you're correct, but not in reality. You actually got almost there. You said "if they say yes, but their body language says no..." you're right about this. If they're body language is NO it's definitely a no. But here's the flipside to that. If their words are no and their body language is yes, it's a YES! But people get themselves into trouble because people are getting worse and worse at reading body language...something something too much time on the internet probably.
I actually wish it was as simple as this video makes it out to be, but it simply isn't.
The thing I noticed in the tea video was them saying you can make a cup of tea and leave it out for them......what does that mean in relation to consent?
It essentially means that even if you might expect consent - it is not consent.
E.g. if you invite someone to come to your house, they agree, they agree to come with you to the kitchen and you start to prepare the tea, they still might decide no to tea and you don't have consent until they agree to the tea.
Equally, someone can show you they are interested in tea because they consentingly send you pictures of their teabags. They might even ask to see your teaspoon. However, they then decide that they actually don't want the tea.
There is no assumed consent to have tea because of other actions that might lead up to drinking tea.
@@Panda-moan-ium😂 i like that explanation.
I just found out that people should probably move out of North Carolina. If you know, you know. Or get that law changed.
What if the person is half asleep?
Then I guess they can half consent. LOL
🍵🍟♥
On the flip side of the reversible nature of consent, you can't withdraw consent after the act you consented to is completed. This should be obvious, but it doesn't stop it from happening, or from being valid in court.
But that's the whole thing of it can be taken away and it can be withdrawn, if I was kinda there but then no longer there guess what? My consent has been revoked and the action stops, that's how it's reversible.
At 1:50 she does the "mocking male voice" thing that many men have heard from significant others.
This is better
I have a very good and simple solution: no sex until marriage. While getting engaged, you create a clear set of mutually agreed upon rules about sex that take effect after marriage.
We need to start shaming extra-marital sex again.
Womp Womp
Coercion is not consent? Well of course not. It's an attempt to get someone to do something. Saying yes as a result of Coercion? That is not consent either?
Good video, but again here the responsibility is put upon the person saying "yes". The point of the tea video is teaching about the person _serving_ the tea, and how to properly act as "host". Maybe FRIES need to be offered along with the tea.
I'm currently considering how to apply these rules to the killing of unborn children in the womb. If the unborn child does not consent to be aborted because it cannot yet speak, is an abortion then murder?
It is.
@@vulpinemachine - Thanks for your opinion! It is interesting that no one else answered during the last 3 weeks. Maybe, because they are afraid to expose themselfes as hypocrites 🙂 :-)
I like what you have done. Great job. I would add that people who are in authority positions over others create a power imbalance and the other person may not feel they have the right or ability to say no. Also, those with a history of trauma may not have the ability to say no and don't feel they have the right to anything but consent. This gets really tricky for a lot of people.
Consent is impossible to understand.
Definitely. They lay it out like it's super duper clear. Except, not everyone, ESPECIALLLY women, follow these "super duper clear rules." In fact, my buddy recently was being threatened by a girl because he DID NOT sleep with her. She was threatening that she would go to the police with and accusation of gRape.
If reality was ACTUALLY like these videos, it would be easy to understand, but it's not like these videos no matter how much they try to say it is.
this is were having a big wallet helps
ok jina the giraffe
but isnts this quite obvious?
Not to some people sadly.
I think u didnt understand the point of the video.
I think she did. She just added to it? Idk what's confusing you
I think she didn't understand the point if the video.
@@panjaro1890 she definetly did.
@@panjaro1890 lol
@@myrtotzaka7440 prob not
how is your relationship with you father
she dosent have one
Christ, a lot of these issues would be resolved if people weren't so promiscuous, stupid and indulging enough to get batshit drunk to pass out or to be so drunk to barely be able to understand each other to begin with.
you are part of the problem, re-evaluate your stance regarding what you think of as an "acceptable level of xxxxx" with promiscuety as the xxxx in this case, from my, and many others viewpoint, you are trying to absolve things like rape due to "oh, we were drunk" when, actually, its rape; "stupid" its still rape. "induging" "hi, rape again". "whatever other bullshit excuse you dream up" is, irl, not an excuse to take advantage of, and use, another person for sexual, or otherwise, gratification. if you disagree, its actually not my problem, but it is a problem for anyone around you. what steps they decide to take, may be Your problem.
@@staberind Doesn't matter if it's an excuse or not, it's gonna happen more frequently because people are horny, people abuse power and drunkeness makes you weaker and lowers both sides ability to take decisive action and know what they are doing.
@@ActionableFreedom more frequently than when? the history of homo sapiens sapiens is the history of nonconsentual sex. its also nott a "both sides" thing, its an agressor and a victim thing, you are trying to shift the onus of responsibility from one party to the other, thats kind of deplorable, I'd step back from this and do a little introspection.
And people still assault their spouses without consent.
wat is je nummer
There is no crime more heinous than **** which is why consent is so important. It's not as simple as tea, but it's still pretty simple. You do not have sexual consent if she (or they):
a) explicitly says no
b) says nothing
c) weakly acquiesces
d) is inebriated
e) if you're inebriated
f) is in an emotionally vulnerable state
g) is being financially coerced
h) lacks understanding about how sex and birth control work
i) lacks enthusiasm
j) doesn't like how you look naked
k) regrets having sex with you
I'm probably
No crime more heinous than... **?
Also how are you listing *regret* among the others. You cannot hold others responsible for you making bad *choices* you later regret.
No crime more heinous than... **?
Also how are you listing *regret* among the others. You cannot hold others responsible for you making bad *choices* you later regret.
lol. k is the best one since you'd need to be a mind reader of someone's future mind in order to ever receive consent then. i'm a dude and i have a few regrets, does that mean i've been r.@.p.3.d.?
@@phoenixfire8226 yes. Congratulations! Unfortunately our work as feminists is not done yet, so you as a man still cannot extort the people who made you a victim unless you transition your gender. I dream of a day when people of EVERY gender have the freedom to frivolously destroy the lives of other people through r*p* accusations. I hope you share my dream.
@@phoenixfire8226 yes. Congratulations!
I mean they're not saying it's the whole spectrum of consent. Like get a life.
it's not going good, i- oh, you weren't really asking, sorry
Yes or no it's as easy as that lol
Except if you coerce someone into saying "yes" or that person is incapacitated while saying "yes" or that person is not fully informed about what they are saying "yes" to, then it's not consent.
@@liammarshall-butler3384 well yeah but are you gonna tie someone up and make them say yes because im not going to lol
I was coherced into sex by my first girlfriend. We were both 12. I did say 'yes', but it was a weary, 'fine whatever just get it over with' sort of yes. She had asked me about 100 times to do sexual stuff, she wore me down. It wasn't her fault as she had been abused and thought this was normal, and she probably didn't realise what she was doing was psychologically wearing me down, but no she didn't 'tie me up' but it was just as damaging because I felt like I had no choice, if I didn't do it she would be mad or leave me and I liked her.
@marcydarcie5884 that's rough im sorry to hear that happend
Oh well, but if you don’t have sex before marriage, you kind of cannot even hypothetically come to the point where consent almost has to be certified in writing…
Consent still counts inside a marriage. Marriage is not a blanket consent for whatever someone wants to do to you whenever.
Ohhh..... but what if the opinions of the followers of weird modern cults don't actually change the fact that your esoteric view, among many other esoteric viewpoints, of the present status of "marriage"* is absoutely meaningless?
*subject to change, like the rest of reality.
@@maria24thst I hope you're not saying that consent in marriage should work ANYTHING like this video because I guarantee you this low-trust, verify everything, IRS level scrutiny is a surefire way to destroy all passion inside a marriage. Anyone who has a good marriage does not practice consent in the way this video suggests consent should operate. There's still consent, it just doesn't work this way AT ALL.