this post was submitted on 28 Feb 2025
927 points (98.3% liked)
196
4767 readers
1323 users here now
Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.
Rule: You must post before you leave.
If you have any questions, feel free to contact us on our matrix channel.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The foundation of every activity people do together is consent. That doesn't mean I need the consent of everyone in the room to talk about something.
The second paragraph has my full support, the first one seems weird to me.
No, and your sex ed is incomplete if you don't understand this.
No, not every activity is consensual. What consent is, is a deeper question and interaction than what you're making it out to be.
Consent is the foundation of sexual education and sexual interactions.
Freedom of speech is separate, and no, you don't "need the consent of everyone in the room to talk about something," but then you're operating outside of consent, and you may violate emotional boundaries. That includes triggering survivors who may not have expected you to violate social norms and who would have told you, "hey, I don't like talking about sex in front of people because I get panic attacks."
These interactions, being between more than 1 person, require the input of the other people. It's not a great look to force people into accepting sex as you see it or want it.
That's true but that's also true for any number of topics. This is a general "how/when do I talk about potentially triggering topics" issue and has nothing to do with sexual consent.
My dude, you set up the strawman argument of speech in a conversation about sexual consent. They were just trying to explain how they're not the same thing.
No. I reacted to someone claiming that hearing about sex needs the hearing parties consent, the same as sex needs consent which I don't agree with.
Talking about sex needs to be done with some caution to not upset others, like many other topics. It's different from the consent needed for engaging in sexual activities with someone.
This makes sense to me. The idea that discussion of sex is itself a sexual act seems like it muddies the topic.
There's certainly ways of discussing sex that require consent, like erotic roleplaying or something where you're involving the other person directly, but that's not what the original post is about.
If any discussion of sex is taboo in public situations it leads to exactly the sort of issues OP is trying to reduce, where the norms of silence act as a shield for abusers.