Honestly, I think part of the problem is trying to fit everything into the model of “rape” or “perfectly ok sex,” with rape being a legal crime. There are a lot of things that shouldn’t be legal crimes that you still shouldn’t do. And that’s really where I think affirmative consent comes into play. Not as a legal standard, but as a moral (and perhaps pragmatic) principle that one should generally refrain from trying to pressure, manipulate, or coerce people into sexual situations that they don’t want to be in. I’m also firmly of the belief that this doesn’t just apply to sex itself - for example, I would not recommend the surprise kiss unless one is quite sure it is going to be welcomed.
I agree then.
That said, sadly, there are enough men out there who think raping an unconscious, unresponsive woman is an ok thing to do - see the Brock Turner case.
If the woman is unresponsive from the beginning and the man is sober, then yeah, that standard could be applied, i.e. non-responsive and no prior agreement = rape. But I wouldn’t agree with making rapits of drunken men having sex with drunken women the moment the woman stops being responsive because of passing out during the intercourse, especially in a gradual and debatable way that can’t even be proved in court.
Unfortunately, the legal concept of rape in legal systems derived from England is that the man’s a rapist if the woman’s consent is somehow vitiated, to a large extent regardless of whether he applies violence (including coercion, threats etc.) or deceit or not. European definitions tend to focus more on the act of overcoming resistance or denying an opportunity for it. I think that’s healthier.
Not that I’d have much against fining people for even perfectly consensual fornication, but rape should really be rape, not something that isn’t rape but happens to meet the flawed legal definition because of a technicality (including statutory rape, which should simply be called intercourse with a minor below the age of consent rather than upgraded to fake rape).
I think those debatable rape charges based on finding some issue with the woman’s consent are also part of the problem, i.e. part of what makes the matter of a woman’s consent taken less than seriously, particularly in certain cultures.
A woman’s consent won’t be taken seriously if you need to get it notarized in order for it to be valid and affirmatively, persuasively prove non-revocation in order to be able to rely on it, because that effectively deprives women of agency along with realistic capacity for consenting. The monkey business about technicalities should end, then the matter can be taken more seriously at law and consequently, subsequently also in daily life (which is heavily influenced by how the law regards the matter).
I don’t think you get yelled at in the street as often as you claim, if ever. I think you’d like to be yelled at in the street because it 1) makes you feel attractive and 2) gives you a nice fat victim card to play whenever an argument gets tough. Funny how all this catcalling is happening but I’ve never seen it, no one I know (except for women) has ever done or seen it, but it is constantly happening, I’m assured. Funny how its always brought up when a woman is arguing with a man and needs an emotional appeal to rally the troops in her defense. I mean what can I say? If I argue any more than I’m a heartless jerk. If I doubt your story than I’m suddenly as bad or worse than the very men who allegedly did it.
Exaggerations exist, and sadly they do so for the very reasons you mention, but we don’t have any reason to believe any of them applies to DarkLight or that she isn’t being honest with us. Next, I’ve seen the catcalling in places calmer and safer for women than the US. It does happen, and it isn’t that rare.
I just want to know what you mean exactly.
