Conversation

People need to understand that consent is not the same thing as willingness or desire.

Consent is merely acceptance. It can be given begrudgingly, under negative circumstances. It implies absolutely no actual desire to do something. It doesn't mean the person will be happy about what happened.

It may be that the law should use consent as the criteria for what is acceptable. But this is only because legal codes should generally be more permissive than moral codes.

You don't want to invoke a powerful authority like the state for every disagreeable action. It's overkill. You want to reserve illegality for things that cross a fairly high threshold of immorality, where action on behalf of a powerful entity like law enforcement and the judicial system become desirable.

However, in our morals, we should strive for something better than consent. We should strive for mutual desire and genuine willingness.

If we foster the idea that consent is the be all, end all of acceptable treatment of others, there will naturally be people who are constantly pushing against the edge of what is legal. Every once in a while, they will cross it. But even if they don't cross that line, they will frequently be inflicting some pain, or at least discomfort, on others. Because they disregard genuine willingness. They disregard what the other person actually desires.

This applies to all human interaction. It applies tenfold to intimacy.

#NeilGaiman #Gaiman #Consent

Public

Notices

Feeds