There\u2019s a super annoying thing the American leftards are pushing for within their universities and, of course, as the brainwashed students graduate, the thing then spreads into the world. It\u2019s the concept of explicit consent.<\/p>\n
Basically, in order to not be accused of some violation or another, you would need to ask permission, verbally and explicitly, and granularly, for every interaction with another person.<\/p>\n
Let me illustrate what that would look like.<\/p>\n
\u201cDo you mind if I sit here?\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cDo you mind if I buy you a coffee?\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cDo you mind if I put my hand on your shoulder in order to draw your attention to something I want to show you?\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cDo you mind if I hold your hand?\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cDo you mind if I kiss you?\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cDo you mind if I kiss you again?\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cI would like to hold you, if that\u2019s all right with you?\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cWould you like to have sex with me?\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cCan I take your clothes off?\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cDo you still want to have sex with me?\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cI\u2019d like to have an orgasm now, if that\u2019s ok with you?\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cCan I pull it out now?\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cDo you want me to make you coffee?\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cCan I kiss you now?\u201d<\/p>\n
Honestly, such idiocy could have been conceived only in leftist academia, because only they are so removed from all genuine human experience in the real world, for them to think that such a thing could possibly make sense. In reality, the first few steps are reasonable and make sense as common courtesy; people who are not yet introduced to each other need to do so gradually, in order to establish the level of contact they are comfortable with. However, after the basic introductions have been made, if a man keeps asking for permission for every single thing, instead of just judging the level of chemistry and going from there, any reasonable woman will see him as insecure, tentative and in fact super creepy. Also, the insistence that consent can be withdrawn at any point, even in retrospect, is incredibly dangerous. You see, it sounds nice and empowering to say that a woman can withdraw consent for intimacy at any point and it\u2019s her right to say \u201cno\u201d, but imagine a situation where a woman leads a man on to the point where they are naked in bed, because she already consented to having sex, but now she says \u201cno, that\u2019s enough\u201d because that makes her feel powerful. Great, but how is the man going to feel? Probably used for her mind games; taken advantage of, manipulated and violated. She\u2019s basically going to piss him off and alienate him forever, if he has any self-respect worth speaking of. Also, what\u2019s going to happen to women who play the empowerment games by making themselves attractive only to be able to say \u201cno\u201d, is that men are going to catch on, and then women will run out of men to say \u201cno\u201d to, because men will stop asking. That\u2019s already a thing in America, BTW; the men almost entirely left the dating game and women who fucked around are starting to find out, and what they are finding out is that their major weapon and source of power, the sexual attractiveness to men, stops working if abused, and they are then left in a position of utter and complete disempowerment, because nobody cares about anything they have to offer. Nobody holds the door for them, nobody offers to help carry heavy bags, nobody offers their seat in public transport, nobody comments their look, nobody talks to them, nobody flirts with them, nobody asks them out. Everybody is just politely avoiding them as if they were a non-entity, not exactly lepers but more like dangerous, manipulative social outcasts whose game has been figured out.<\/p>\n
And then women ask where are all the good men gone, and why is everybody ignoring them. Well, children, that\u2019s the danger of playing power games with other people. They are not stupid, and they can retaliate. A woman\u2019s power is to say no, but a man\u2019s power is to not offer.<\/p>\n
Yes, consent is important; however, it\u2019s not absolute, unless you\u2019re an omnipotent, completely independent and untouchable God or Goddess. If you need things, your consent is relative, and if you really need things, your consent might not matter at all, because you might not be in a position to refuse anything. Let me use work as an example. In the context of work, consent means you really need money in order to buy food and pay the bills, and you will offer to work for someone who can use your abilities and finds them useful enough to pay you money for it. This is a voluntary and consensual business relationship, but it doesn\u2019t mean you have to like it in a sense that you would keep doing it even if you had unlimited financial resources, which is how the leftards would qualify a non-coercive relationship. Of course most consensual relationships are coercive and exploitative. Someone will offer you money if you work for them, and you will accept because you need the money more than you object to doing what you\u2019re asked to do. Also, there are examples of non-consensual interactions that are completely fine, for instance if your heart suddenly stops and you fall down on a sidewalk, and a stranger jumps in and performs CPR on you and breaks your ribs and you are revived, no part of that interaction was consensual, a stranger put their hands on you with enough force to break your ribs, put their mouth on yours and exhaled into your lungs, your permission was neither sought, nor were you in a position to give it, and yet the only thing you are reasonably expect to do is thank them for saving your life, not sue them for touching you without permission while you were incapacitated. Basically, the less power you have the less likely you are to be asked permission about things, and requiring others to ask your permission is perceived as trying to acquire power others might not be willing to give you, and you might find yourself in a situation where you crave the opportunity to say no, but others refuse you that power by simply not offering anything. The trick with consensual relationship is that they go both ways. By saying \u201cno\u201d you are not just gaining power, you are also cutting off interest, which, if done too frequently, makes your power moot, or, in other words, you get to be rejected yourself, and in a way you might not be able to handle at all.<\/p>\n
That\u2019s the main problem with what all those leftards and feminazis are doing: society is a complicated dance, mostly non-verbal, between pushing too hard and not doing enough, between enforcing your boundaries and being sensitive to other people\u2019s needs and wants. Sure, you can try to enforce rules according to which consensual sex means having a notarised written permission, and everything else qualifies as rape, and women will applaud you until they notice that they became so powerful that men don\u2019t want to have anything to do with that, because it\u2019s too risky. Even talking to a woman who can arbitrarily decide to report you for harassment and have you fired is too risky. So, then women find out that their main source of power in a society stems from being wanted by men, and if men withdraw their interest, women find themselves in a position where they are completely and utterly powerless. Power, respect and consent are games with multiple players. Just saying.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
There\u2019s a super annoying thing the American leftards are pushing for within their universities and, of course, as the brainwashed students graduate, the thing then spreads into the world. It\u2019s the concept of explicit consent. Basically, in order to not … Continue reading