Show of HandsShow of Hands

kermie October 25th, 2014 6:25pm

When it comes to sex, we all know "no means no." But does yes always mean yes?

10 Liked

Comments: Add Comment

TierasPet
10/27/14 8:19 am

I'm not sure on that one. I think it does but I also think many people regret that yes later. Interestingly there were 69 comments on this poll when I commented. LOL

Reply
cowboy Dawns Highway
10/27/14 8:08 am

Only women can say no in the middle of, or after sex, and put a man in prison. Crafty bitches can lure, seduce, and claim a man "raped" her when it was totally consensual but she gets embarrassed or shamed. Protect yourselves young men.

Reply
kermie gaytopia
10/27/14 9:28 pm

That's why I'm gay, bro. You should try it.

cowboy Dawns Highway
10/28/14 4:20 am

Lol! No thank you.

Arananthi Literal Ninja
10/25/14 7:40 pm

Nope. Your consent has to be (correctly) informed, you have to be in your right mind, you must be at or above the age of consent, and you must be agreeing to a sex act that is legal in your current location. Then and only then does yes mean yes.

Axl752 NY
10/25/14 8:21 pm

A guy and a girl both of age get drunk together and fuck, are they raping each other?

Maj Worth Economist
10/25/14 9:55 pm

Technically - under either no-means-no or yes-means-yes - yes.

kermie gaytopia
10/25/14 10:03 pm

Rape is NOT a technicality. You're trying to force it into something manageable and easy to teach. But it's not. One person may experience rape from the exact same circumstances that another may not.

kermie gaytopia
10/25/14 10:04 pm

I understand for legal purposes we may need technical black and white definitions. But that does a huge disservice to actual victims who may not have experienced rape by the book, and people who may have but don't feel raped.

Maj Worth Economist
10/25/14 10:07 pm

Excuse me. If neither party is able to consent, then the opposite party raped them. So the fact that each was drunk is not a valid defense to being a rapist, but the fact that each was drunk means they couldn't consent to the other.

Maj Worth Economist
10/25/14 10:10 pm

I'm one of both, kermie. I have been both raped & not wanted it, and technically raped and not felt like it. So what? Prosecutorial discretion is allowed, but discussing technicalities is also allowed. If nothing else, it helps us write better laws.

kermie gaytopia
10/25/14 10:12 pm

So what???? o.O

I guess I'm of the opinion that technicalities never make for better laws. The more we try to define what's okay and what's not the more we miss and muck it up. It gets worse not better.

kermie gaytopia
10/25/14 10:16 pm

Anyway I think I'm not making myself very well understood here, so I'm going to step away for now.

greeengoddess Minnesota
10/25/14 7:30 pm

If the person was coerced into saying yes, then no. Consent is not truly given.

greeengoddess Minnesota
10/25/14 7:31 pm

This goes for if the person is made to be afraid to say no.

thebarr
10/25/14 5:29 pm

If the person is a competent adult, when wouldn't it?

Reply
TopsQueen Oregon Coast
10/25/14 4:54 pm

I would say not always. Check my Instagram page we are at the beach today and I've been thinking of you.

skinner Jersey City
10/25/14 3:23 pm

Yes does not always mean yes. If the sexual partner is intoxicated, a minor, or a prostitute then he or she is not actually consenting.

Reply
Axl752 NY
10/25/14 3:34 pm

How about if "he" is intoxicated?

skinner Jersey City
10/25/14 3:38 pm

As I inferred by saying "he or she" the gender is irrelevant.

Axl752 NY
10/25/14 3:50 pm

Should an intoxicated person be held accountable for their actions if they get behind the wheel?

skinner Jersey City
10/25/14 4:15 pm

Those scenarios are incomparable. A drunk driver poses a threat to society. An intoxicated person who has been taken advantage of in any way especially sexually deserves justice.

Axl752 NY
10/25/14 4:50 pm

Why is it any different if a drunk person decides to have sex or if a drunk person decides to drive. Why can she be held accountable for one but not the other?

skinner Jersey City
10/25/14 7:08 pm

I explained the difference. In the case of drunk driving an intoxicated individuals impaired judgement may cost lives. The other scenario involves a sober person taking advantage of an intoxicated individual.

Injectable Trump Killed Babbitt
10/25/14 3:10 pm

When did sex as a result of being drunk/high become someone elses fault. It's a consequence of your bad choices. (This doesn't count raping someone passed out.)

Reply
thebarr
10/25/14 5:31 pm

Ditto. If you're passed out, you're not saying yes.

But if you're saying yes, well ...

JustBob Your anger fascinates me
10/25/14 2:57 pm

Minor and completely wasted are the two exceptions that comes to mind

Reply
osouless Whats Next
10/25/14 2:46 pm

How about we just give up on this whole thing and commit mass earth wide suicide. There'd be much fewer problems.

Reply
Axl752 NY
10/25/14 1:07 pm

From what I understand this "yes means yes" movement means that women can consent to sex, but if they later regret it they can take back consent after the act? And therefore the man will be guilty of rape? Do I have this right?

Reply
trepidhickory Ayy Lmao
10/25/14 12:50 pm

If it's coming from someone who doesn't understand the situation or is not of sound mind then no yes does not always mean yes

bison Messiah of Ron Paul
10/25/14 12:27 pm

Well of course it does. Unless one person doesn't speak English or something

Angela12 Anyang, South Korea
10/25/14 8:45 pm

What if one person is 15? Or threatened? Just the word itself doesn't always equal proper consent.

Zod Above Pugetropolis
10/25/14 12:15 pm

It does, unless it is coerced, or is offered by someone who is ineligible (under the age of consent, impaired, etc). It seems like the long way around to get to one of the first lessons we all learned in grade school, to respect each other's space.

Reply
brenstal Florida
10/25/14 12:07 pm

If it's coming from an adult of sound mind. It doesn't count for people below age of consent, drunk/high people, and coerced people.

Reply
JustBob Your anger fascinates me
10/25/14 2:58 pm

Crap, I said the same thing up there, guess I should read first

jvc1133 61535
10/25/14 11:57 am

I like to think yes means yes, or is that what is, is ?

rons Thanks America
10/25/14 11:57 am

I don't know? The left hand never knows what the right hand is doing.

Arkansas123 Neoconservative
10/25/14 11:53 am

I support a somewhat more traditional definition of rape:

(1) sex obtained by force;
(2) sex obtained by duress;
(3) sex obtained by deception; or
(4) sex against someone incapable of consent.

Reply
Arkansas123 Neoconservative
10/25/14 11:54 am

In my opinion, #4 ought to include minors and individuals who are mentally handicapped as well as individuals who are unconscious, etc.

Two drunk people having sex is not rape.

kermie gaytopia
10/25/14 2:39 pm

I agree.

kermie gaytopia
10/25/14 11:33 am

I think this "yes means yes" campaign, though well intentioned, is one of the worst things to happen to our societal dialogue about rape and sexual assault. We're trying to neatly define and contain something that doesn't have easy parameters.

Reply
PartyJustin R.O.C.K. in the R.O.C.
10/25/14 11:39 am

The whole purpose of this campaign is to highlight that waiting for an explicit no is not always a good idea. It's a far better practice to try getting a yes. This doesn't mean there'll never be a case of yes not meaning yes, but at least...

PartyJustin R.O.C.K. in the R.O.C.
10/25/14 11:39 am

an attempt was made to be sure the other person was willing. Do you really think that's a bad thing?

kermie gaytopia
10/25/14 11:50 am

I think oversimplifying it is the bad thing.

Maj Worth Economist
10/25/14 6:58 pm

I'm for it. And I'm for it because no-means-no requires that the victim prove they said no. And if they don't prove it hard enough, their rapist walks. But they're not on trial. Yes-means-yes puts the responsibility on the rapist where it belongs.

Maj Worth Economist
10/25/14 7:17 pm

WTF? No. If you murder someone, that's all you - did you, or did you not deliberately cause someone's death? But under no-means-no, the question is did the victim give or not give their consent? Yes-means-yes turns a rape trial into a normal one.

Maj Worth Economist
10/25/14 7:19 pm

It goes back to being about the alleged perpetrator, not the victim. Did the accused get permission or not? The prosecution argues they didn't. The defense argues they did. The victim isn't the one on trial.

Arkansas123 Neoconservative
10/25/14 7:26 pm

The onus is on the prosecution to prove that the accused violated the law -- i.e., that he employed unlawful force, threats, or deception to obtain sex.

RoDe Latinus wordsus
10/25/14 11:28 am

Not if it's somehow coerced.

Reply
EarlyBird Portland
10/25/14 11:28 am

If someone says "yes" and doesn't mean it, that's messed up.

Reply
kermie gaytopia
10/25/14 11:30 am

They may not understand. They may be too young or too mentally handicapped. They may be scared. They may be coerced or drunk or any number of things.

EarlyBird Portland
10/25/14 11:31 am

Ok Kermie, you set a trap and I fell for it.

EarlyBird Portland
10/25/14 11:33 am

I think of those things as a given

kermie gaytopia
10/25/14 11:34 am

Sorry, I wasn't trying to trap or trick anyone. I'm trying to point out the danger of oversimplifying the idea of rape.

EarlyBird Portland
10/25/14 11:38 am

We're heading in a direction of needing signed consensual forms before having sex that I'm trying to avoid. That's all.

Maj Worth Economist
10/25/14 7:02 pm

"They may not understand. They may be too young or too mentally handicapped. They may be scared. They may be coerced or drunk or any number of things." Yes-means-yes doesn't change any of that. Those people can't consent, which means there's no yes.

EarlyBird Portland
10/25/14 7:35 pm

Maj- did you miss the part where I said I get that?

kermie gaytopia
10/25/14 8:12 pm

Uh but they can still say the word "yes."

Trivializing it to a slogan like "yes means yes" makes people think all you need to hear is "yes" or "no."

EarlyBird Portland
10/25/14 8:16 pm

Kermie- if this is about a slogan, I've not heard of it. Sorry.
As I mentioned earlier, I thought most of us on SoH have move past having to point out the obvious.

kermie gaytopia
10/25/14 8:20 pm

It's the new thing on college campuses. Yes means yes. They even talk about "enthusiastic yes."

The problem is Early that not all exceptions are "obvious." Consent is a continuum, not a binary as we want to think it is.

Maj Worth Economist
10/25/14 8:54 pm

I totally disagree, Kermie. But that's because I know that there's a lot more to the program that a three word slogan.

kermie gaytopia
10/25/14 9:13 pm

Yes, we will probably have to agree to disagree.

Maj Worth Economist
10/25/14 9:58 pm

Kermie... On this subject, you sort of sound like a fearmongerer. So let's actually start bringing facts into this discussion - because there aren't many here. www.cnn.com/2014/09/03/living/affirmative-consent-school-policy/

kermie gaytopia
10/25/14 10:01 pm

Fear? Of what? You don't seem to know me if you think I'm fearmongering. Exactly the opposite. Most people around here sensationalize and compartmentalize this and most subjects. I'm just realizing it's gray like everything else.

Maj Worth Economist
10/25/14 10:04 pm

It doesn't seem that way because you're taking three words (as if the law is three words, or the classes they teach on it three words) literally and over-simplistically. I think that's a bit dishonest.

kermie gaytopia
10/25/14 10:07 pm

*sigh* no I'm not. I've repeatedly said that. The problem is that a lot of people do take it that way. Thats the whole point of the question. No matter how well-meaning, the campaign has been turned into a slogan most people don't understand.

magicalgirling
10/25/14 11:28 am

Not if the person is pressuring you to say yes.

Reply