Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

1

selver wrote

Having someone able to turn around, point a finger, and say "you raped me" sounds like a bad idea.

Why is that a bad idea? You don't want to know when you've hurt someone, so that you can then attempt to have better sexual encounters in the future? You want to just ignore that a partner feels uncomfortable about an experience they had with you? (although I agree that using the word "rape" for everything is a bad idea, it's not nuanced enough)

I don't see how that could be anything but positive if done by anarchists/radicals who are interested in using non-legalistic consent models (as anarchists should be, obviously).

2

squirrels wrote

I personally think that the problem is if it's applied within the state and people call upon the power of the state to enforce consent as a felt sense. I am wary of applying this in the context of the state, as such ambiguous policing of sex has more often than not been used to punish queer or otherwise marginalized people.

Having said that, I will say that this concept helped me heal a few years ago when I first ran across it. It was therapeutic and I think it could be a powerful tool toward dismantling patriarchal notions of sex. And, as you said, it's something to consider in non-legalistic models.

2

selver wrote

Yeah I agree with all of that. I think it's useful for personal ethics & relationships for anarchists, but definitely wouldn't want a State or the more mainstream witch-burning libs to be pushing it.