6 ms·

>People can change their mind So, a new era of abstinence is ahead of us. There is simply no other way for anyone to feel safe than to simply abstain. Person

>People can change their mind So, a new era of abstinence is ahead of us. There is simply no other way for anyone to feel safe than to simply abstain. Personally I'm okay with this, but I know a lot of teenagers who grew up thinking sex is an important facet of their identity who will disagree... Frankly, though, I think a more conservative society which treats sex with a lot more respect than the current shit-show, is definitely in order.

neilsense 6y ago
Or sex work is going to go be very lucrative as casual sexual relationships incur more of a tax if there is even the slightest bit of confusion on consent (not to mention the fact that most people have alcohol in them, some have drugs, others just have bad experiences and carry regrets...).
rodgerd 6y ago
Or you could - and I know this is a novel idea - treat people well and not be rapey.
- dang 6y ago
  Please don't post unsubstantive and/or flamebait comments to HN. This is classic internet flamebait complete with snark—exactly what the site guidelines ask you not to do in HN threads. If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful. Edit: it unfortunately looks like you've been doing this repeatedly. That's not ok, and we ban such accounts for what ought to be obvious reasons. Please stick to the rules from now on.
- oilbagz 6y ago
  Its not just a matter of 'not being rapey' - its a matter of agency over the sexual act. If you get consent from your partner, have sex with them, and then your partner changes their mind about it afterwards - for any reason they determine under their own agency, what is to be done to avoid the danger of being falsely accused of not having gained consent, other than to simply abstain? If consent can be retracted after the act, the act is not safe. So abstinence is the only answer. And really, this shift towards abstinence is an appropriate social response.
  - chosenbreed37 6y ago
    Perhaps the surveillance state might save the day. If the sequence of interactions is recorded a jury could review it and decide if any consent was given or given and subsequently withdrawn at any point :-)
  - afarrell 6y ago
    Abstinence is the only answer _with an ironclad guarantee_. Fundamentally, sex requires trust and analog communication over a connection either physical or verbal.
    - eru 6y ago
      Nope, you can still be falsely accused of almost anything.
      - afarrell 6y ago
        True. So I advise not having sex with someone if you do not trust their ethics or emotional maturity.
        eru 6y ago
        No, I meant even not having sex (abstinence) doesn't 100% protect against accusations. Of course, in practice people deal with certainly below absolute. But once you admit that, the argument for absolute abstinence loses some of its punch.
  - viraptor 6y ago
    "Change their mind" was never about changing mind afterwards. It's about "I don't like what you're doing, you should stop now" situation even if you were happy up to that point. You misunderstood the idea.
    - oilbagz 6y ago
      Or perhaps it is you who doesn't understand the word 'abstain'. If your partner changes mind mid-act, of course you stop - that is abstaining from further activity. The point is, this is precisely the kind of confusion to avoid by maintaining abstinence as your primary mindset. It is the only way to be sure: abstain at all costs, even if you were given consent, because that consent is not immutable.
eru 6y ago
> There is simply no other way for anyone to feel safe than to simply abstain. Well, it's the same as with anti-natalism: People who don't care about this stuff, will still have kids / take 'consent risks' to have sex. An important complication about the topic at hand is that a lot of human courtship / flirting, involves plausible deniability. Eg extensive eye contact in a bar can indicate sexual interest, or perhaps you just have a booger on your nose. Similarly, status and power play are just as much ingrained in human psyche as sexual behaviour. So there's lots of overlap. Lots of people enjoy when their prospective mate is a bit brazen (or, the opposite, plays extra shy). Playing with social convention is a big part. Human behaviour is messy.
- skohan 6y ago
  You're absolutely right. Human sexuality predates language, so it shouldn't be surprising that it continues to have a non-verbal, sub-rational component. I think the discussion of explicit consent is really intended as guidance for children/teenagers who don't the dance yet. For experienced adults it's possible to navigate all of these grey areas and read the underlying signals while being crystal clear about playing within the boundaries which are acceptable to both sides. But for kids who are still figuring this out, it's perfectly reasonable to suggest that people use their words and be unambiguous.
ginko 6y ago
>Frankly, though, I think a more conservative society which treats sex with a lot more respect than the current shit-show, is definitely in order. Conservative societies generally had more sex than we do now.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- skohan 6y ago
  I once spent a summer in a conservative, religious country and let me tell you there was a lot of sex going on behind closed doors. And a lot of it was way more transgressive that what was happening in my left-leaning, permissive university culture.
- oilbagz 6y ago
  The safer or not-safer kind?
  - ginko 6y ago
    If you think the Victorians typically used condoms or only had sex in wedlock then you're quite mistaken.
    - oilbagz 6y ago
      "Conservative" = cautiously moderate, i.e. in this instance, not engaging in sex with reckless abandon, but rather with caution and moderation. If you think "Victorians" are what is meant when someone refers to a conservative society, then you might need to read a few more books. Its quite possible to be conservative on the subject of sexual activity, while also voting Democrat.
auganov 6y ago
It's been my impression that's exactly what it has been all along. Sex outside of marriage (or even just procreation) is a pretty bad idea but people are afraid to say it because it's "conservative". Sexual everything has become such a staple in some circles that people don't have an easy way of saying they're not interested in most of it.
- oilbagz 6y ago
  Sex is the oldest form of political power, and provides the shortest path to irrational reactionary thought available to the modern propagandist or political operative intent on influencing culture over generations. Our current ("Western") ideals for how sexuality is to be portrayed by our social institutions doesn't allow for much escape from the negative effects that this power can have over the individual. Hopefully that will change. One way it can change, positively, is for people to learn abstinence culture and just refrain from the act, entirely. If you never bother attempting to initiate sexual activity, you're pretty safe from those who would use the sex act to alter your life. And if you eschew participating in collective sex-culture, its pretty easy to keep this under control, at a personal level.
  - auganov 6y ago
    Not sure what exactly you're referring to. It's virtually impossible to prosecute most sexual crimes. And if somebody's really out to frame you, the truth doesn't matter in the first place. Getting murdered by an angry lover may be more likely. All this does is make people think twice. If you're married and trying to have children how can any craziness ever happen? Not sure what "collective sex-culture" is, but it may be what many just call "promiscuity" (which is kind of my point).

neilsense 6y ago

Or sex work is going to go be very lucrative as casual sexual relationships incur more of a tax if there is even the slightest bit of confusion on consent (not to mention the fact that most people have alcohol in them, some have drugs, others just have bad experiences and carry regrets...).

rodgerd 6y ago

Or you could - and I know this is a novel idea - treat people well and not be rapey.

dang 6y ago
Please don't post unsubstantive and/or flamebait comments to HN. This is classic internet flamebait complete with snark—exactly what the site guidelines ask you not to do in HN threads. If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful. Edit: it unfortunately looks like you've been doing this repeatedly. That's not ok, and we ban such accounts for what ought to be obvious reasons. Please stick to the rules from now on.
oilbagz 6y ago
Its not just a matter of 'not being rapey' - its a matter of agency over the sexual act. If you get consent from your partner, have sex with them, and then your partner changes their mind about it afterwards - for any reason they determine under their own agency, what is to be done to avoid the danger of being falsely accused of not having gained consent, other than to simply abstain? If consent can be retracted after the act, the act is not safe. So abstinence is the only answer. And really, this shift towards abstinence is an appropriate social response.
- chosenbreed37 6y ago
  Perhaps the surveillance state might save the day. If the sequence of interactions is recorded a jury could review it and decide if any consent was given or given and subsequently withdrawn at any point :-)
- afarrell 6y ago
  Abstinence is the only answer _with an ironclad guarantee_. Fundamentally, sex requires trust and analog communication over a connection either physical or verbal.
  - eru 6y ago
    Nope, you can still be falsely accused of almost anything.
    - afarrell 6y ago
      True. So I advise not having sex with someone if you do not trust their ethics or emotional maturity.
      - eru 6y ago
        No, I meant even not having sex (abstinence) doesn't 100% protect against accusations. Of course, in practice people deal with certainly below absolute. But once you admit that, the argument for absolute abstinence loses some of its punch.
- viraptor 6y ago
  "Change their mind" was never about changing mind afterwards. It's about "I don't like what you're doing, you should stop now" situation even if you were happy up to that point. You misunderstood the idea.
  - oilbagz 6y ago
    Or perhaps it is you who doesn't understand the word 'abstain'. If your partner changes mind mid-act, of course you stop - that is abstaining from further activity. The point is, this is precisely the kind of confusion to avoid by maintaining abstinence as your primary mindset. It is the only way to be sure: abstain at all costs, even if you were given consent, because that consent is not immutable.

eru 6y ago

> There is simply no other way for anyone to feel safe than to simply abstain. Well, it's the same as with anti-natalism: People who don't care about this stuff, will still have kids / take 'consent risks' to have sex. An important complication about the topic at hand is that a lot of human courtship / flirting, involves plausible deniability. Eg extensive eye contact in a bar can indicate sexual interest, or perhaps you just have a booger on your nose. Similarly, status and power play are just as much ingrained in human psyche as sexual behaviour. So there's lots of overlap. Lots of people enjoy when their prospective mate is a bit brazen (or, the opposite, plays extra shy). Playing with social convention is a big part. Human behaviour is messy.

skohan 6y ago
You're absolutely right. Human sexuality predates language, so it shouldn't be surprising that it continues to have a non-verbal, sub-rational component. I think the discussion of explicit consent is really intended as guidance for children/teenagers who don't the dance yet. For experienced adults it's possible to navigate all of these grey areas and read the underlying signals while being crystal clear about playing within the boundaries which are acceptable to both sides. But for kids who are still figuring this out, it's perfectly reasonable to suggest that people use their words and be unambiguous.

ginko 6y ago

>Frankly, though, I think a more conservative society which treats sex with a lot more respect than the current shit-show, is definitely in order. Conservative societies generally had more sex than we do now.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
skohan 6y ago
I once spent a summer in a conservative, religious country and let me tell you there was a lot of sex going on behind closed doors. And a lot of it was way more transgressive that what was happening in my left-leaning, permissive university culture.
oilbagz 6y ago
The safer or not-safer kind?
- ginko 6y ago
  If you think the Victorians typically used condoms or only had sex in wedlock then you're quite mistaken.
  - oilbagz 6y ago
    "Conservative" = cautiously moderate, i.e. in this instance, not engaging in sex with reckless abandon, but rather with caution and moderation. If you think "Victorians" are what is meant when someone refers to a conservative society, then you might need to read a few more books. Its quite possible to be conservative on the subject of sexual activity, while also voting Democrat.

auganov 6y ago

It's been my impression that's exactly what it has been all along. Sex outside of marriage (or even just procreation) is a pretty bad idea but people are afraid to say it because it's "conservative". Sexual everything has become such a staple in some circles that people don't have an easy way of saying they're not interested in most of it.

oilbagz 6y ago
Sex is the oldest form of political power, and provides the shortest path to irrational reactionary thought available to the modern propagandist or political operative intent on influencing culture over generations. Our current ("Western") ideals for how sexuality is to be portrayed by our social institutions doesn't allow for much escape from the negative effects that this power can have over the individual. Hopefully that will change. One way it can change, positively, is for people to learn abstinence culture and just refrain from the act, entirely. If you never bother attempting to initiate sexual activity, you're pretty safe from those who would use the sex act to alter your life. And if you eschew participating in collective sex-culture, its pretty easy to keep this under control, at a personal level.
- auganov 6y ago
  Not sure what exactly you're referring to. It's virtually impossible to prosecute most sexual crimes. And if somebody's really out to frame you, the truth doesn't matter in the first place. Getting murdered by an angry lover may be more likely. All this does is make people think twice. If you're married and trying to have children how can any craziness ever happen? Not sure what "collective sex-culture" is, but it may be what many just call "promiscuity" (which is kind of my point).