Consent: A Fresh Perspective

I read this article a few days ago and found myself nodding along and thinking YES the whole time. Harris O'Malley provides such a fresh and interesting perspective on the topic of consent and challenges one of the major aspects on which "rape culture" is built - saying no. I liked the fact that the article focused on steering consent in the direction of a definitive yes as opposed to not saying no. This definitely got me thinking about Lisa K. Waldner's article "Sexual politics in intimate relationships: Sexual coercion and harassment" in which she defines sexual coercion and attempts to make the boundaries of what is and is not considered harassment more clear. Walder defines sexual coercion as "whenever one partner pressures or forces the other to engage in any sexual behavior, ranging from kissing to various types of intercourse (oral, anal, vaginal)" (51). Rape is generally thought of as being on one extreme of the continuum of behaviours and is the most widely discussed in media. However, I think O'Malley's take on gaining a "YES!" in terms of consent should be applied to all forms of sexual behaviour and can be a good perspective to take when understanding harassment.

One point that stood out to me in O'Malley's article was the ideas that "consent isn't a binary decision - it's not all or nothing, always on or always off." I think this ties in well with the pluralist view of sexuality which builds off of the fact that sexual diversity exists and that absolute values cannot be placed on issues regarding sexuality. Additionally, sexual pluralism encourages pleasure and personal autonomy. This idea of attaining pleasure while still maintaining personal autonomy can be linked to the idea that consent is not a binary. Individuals may choose to engage in one act (that some may deem suggestive) that they find pleasurable without wanting to further that, thus exerting their capacity to make decisions. This does not make the first suggestive act wrong and furthermore it does not imply consent because how we choose to behave does not fit perfectly into a binary.

I realize that the unequal division of emphasis in this article reflects a majority of the discussions that have a foothold in mainstream media today. However, an issue that I find with O'Malley's arguments is the fact that it is heavily focused on women. The article talks mainly about men as aggressors and women as victims when it comes to the issue of assault. I feel that this negates the fact that a lot of men find themselves in similar situations and also struggle with understanding whether or not their experiences constitute rape. The dialogue about definitive, enthusiastic consent and clear, open lines of communication can (and should) go both ways. That said, I appreciate the attempt that is made here to begin to eliminate the ambiguity that often surrounds whether or not there was consent in cases of rape. It's a worthwhile read that offers that while sexuality is a diverse and wide-ranging matter, the decisions we make regarding our bodies should be clear and respected regarding of the underlying implications that others may have interpreted. 

Any Day Now

"It's the oldest story in the book. Boy meets girl, boy loses girl, boy kicks open the closet door and finally, meets Mr. Right"

I watched the film Any Day Now a few months back and found it incredibly beautiful, moving, and raw. Based on a true story, the film is set in the 1970's and chronicles a homosexual couple's journey as they fight a biased legal system for custody of a young boy with Down Syndrome who has been abandoned by his mother. I found myself frustrated throughout the film about the injustices faced by the couple, who had to hide their relationship and feign "normality" in order to better their chances of adopting this child. It really brought to light that although situated within what is considered the sexual revolution, a lot of stigma still surrounded any forms of sexuality that deviated from the heterosexual, monogamous arrangement deemed conventional.

It is important to note that the two male characters in the film represent very different aspects of the sexual revolution. Rudy Donatello works as a drag performer and embraces his homosexual identity while Paul Fliger works as a lawyer and buries that part of his identity. Rudy embodies the gay rights movement, freedom of expression and homosexuality as an identity. Paul on the other hand is caught within a system that discourages (and threatens) his sexuality; identifying as a gay man and publicly acknowledging his relationship with Rudy would ruin his career. Although Rudy does not agree with this system, he accepts that this is the case and fabricates a series of lies with Paul to justify their relationship. This web of stories and false identities becomes even more important when they begin their battle for custody of Marco.

The film brought to mind the notion of double standards. We often apply this term to the incongruities in the treatment of sexuality between men and women, but it can also be applied to heterosexual and homosexual identities. Heterosexuality as a norm has been socially constructed within our society and although much progress has been made in terms of increased rights and equality for the LGBTQ community, heterosexuality is still accepted as the dominant orientation. In Any Day Now, Rudy and Paul are forced to hide their relationship (pretending instead to be relatives) in order to receive equal treatment under the law. Despite the fact that the legal system is supposed to be without biases, it is impossible to remove the deeply embedded understandings of what is right and wrong in terms of sexuality from those making the decisions. Had Rudy and Paul been a "normal", heterosexual couple, the would have been granted custody without any hesitation.

Despite feeling a myriad of emotions ranging from frustration to anger to hopelessness while watching this film, I continually recommend it to others. This is because I believe that the message it sends is an important one and that these struggles faced by individuals solely due to their sexuality need to be acknowledged, addressed, and changed. Any Day Now is important because it shows how far we have come as a society in terms of opening up to varying sexualities. It is important because it emphasizes that it wasn't long ago that such grave injustices and biases existed. It is important because it reminds us that they still exist, and that the struggles faced by Rudy and Paul are still real and relevant today.