In my last post, I pondered the possibility of shifting from "no means no" to "yes means yes" with regards to sex. As was pointed out to me, the legal ramifications of such a shift may be untenable. The point of that post was mostly to talk about how the black and white rhetoric of rape ("rape is rape.") silences people whose experience deviates from the classic concept of a woman raped by a male stranger violently or with the threat of violence. Once access to vital healthcare is thrown into the mix, such as abortion, rape becomes a test that must be passed in order appease the morality of those who otherwise condemn a woman's right to make reproductive choices. Pregnancy is not the only devastating effect of rape, yet in this discourse, it is treated as the canary in the coal mine. This ignores rapes that do not result in pregnancy, for example, the epidemic of rape in imprisoned populations.
The structure of rape is built upon power inequalities. In cases that match the extreme standard, the perpetrator has the power to ignore the obvious dissent of the person being raped, whether that has to do with power deriving from violence or from authority, such as an adult over a child. In other less clearly defined cases, my own in particular, I felt as if the person who was acted upon me relied on a narrow definition of consent, taking my silence to mean that I actively desired the attention. Looking back, I wish my awkward, teenage self had felt confident enough to demand a stop or had been wise enough to leave, but there it is. I didn't feel that I could do either of those things. Passive and revolted, I endured. In retrospect, it makes sense that I would zero in on the notion of consent, as if were that in place what had happened to me would not have occurred.
Having been in an established relationship for so many years, I have forgotten the tricky negotiations that take place in vanilla settings, the back and forth of yes/no/maybe. I have been fortunate to have deliberately studied the phenomenon in the kinky community, in part because (usually) the negotiations are explicit and people are very reflexive and articulate. The beginning of an interaction ostensibly relies on affirmative consent. This is the ideal, and though not always practiced, it speaks to the intention of the actors. They believe that with enough information, one can make an appropriate choice of what will be satisfying and positive for oneself. Hand in hand with affirmative consent is the all important safe word. This word has the power to stop any activity cold. This acknowledges that not every situation or reaction can be predicted before the action starts. So in this case, it is a dance between "yes means yes" and "no means no," each strengthening the other. In the kinky community, there is a hyper awareness of how easily sex and violence become problematic when consent is lacking. With my rosy glasses, it seems to me that most people would benefit from acknowledging sex is powerful and has the potential to be damaging.
That being said, there are several structures in place that make consent possible in the kinky community, beyond the obvious negotiation and people embracing the ideal. This group is not radically different from mainstream American society in many aspects and in some ways mirrors the larger mores with surprising clarity. On a fundamental level, people in the kinky community have more equality than one might think. In this case, I am only speaking about the heterosexual group I worked with. Although I worked with a lesbian group, the kind of sexual exploitation I am discussing was not obvious. I didn't work with the men's group, therefore cannot posit how gender would impact their experiences The actual income of men and women, when controlled for age, shows little difference. Traditionally, one of the ways women are forced into sexually exploitative relationships is based on the fact that they are not economically independent. Additionally, women had control over their reproduction, choosing whether or not to risk pregnancy from any particular sexual encounter. When I first learned about feminism, I was puzzled by the fact that this was such a big deal. With easy access to effective birth control, I didn't realize how the powerful spectre of pregnancy shapes women's sexual options. Finally, there is the public nature of some play. Rather than public sex being degrading, it may in fact ensure people's safety. With witnesses, people feel comfortable exploring possibilities that might otherwise be considered too personally dangerous. It gives more credence to the enforcibility of a safe word if there are others there to hold the players accountable.
Even given these positive structures (which may not be reproducible in other settings, given their structural nature or the hesitance of most Americans to have sex in public), power inequalities still exist and lead to sexually exploitative relationships. In my work, almost every woman I met had a less than positive introduction to the kinky community through a man who exploited her lack of knowledge. Let me rush to say that none of them would qualify anything that happened as rape. But it points to one of the major points of weakness in the system. By necessity, my sample was self-selected, since these women remained in the kinky community despite the rocky start. I don't know about the women who had experiences that caused them to leave. This leads to another mark against consent as a panacea. It doesn't matter how explicitly behaviors are discussed ahead of time, people just don't know until they have experience. In the heterosexual community, the men willing to endure the volatility of newbies were likely to exploit their role as keepers of wisdom, usually not out of malice, but because it is a powerful and desirable feeling to be treated as a font of knowledge. That frisson new converts bring to the practice reinvigorates what may have become habit. One of the mitigating factors for women new to the scene was whether they had a same-gendered mentor, whether formal or not. This leads me to believe that it is a combination of gender and experience, not experience alone, that creates the potential for exploitation.
Affirmative consent alone is not the answer to the complex issues surrounding sexuality and power. I think any solution that can be summed up in three words will, by necessity, lead to more harmful rhetoric and dangerous policies. A nuanced view, while harder to chant, may in the end be more productive. In the end, I think reducing sexual exploitation is about honesty, education, and power. I don't think they will wipe rape out but it would be a positive first step toward creating sexual justice.
Good
ReplyDeletehttp://marblesecret.blogspot.com/