Be careful what you demand, it has costs.
Active consent in most universities seems to mean affirmative, honest, conscious, voluntary, sober and ongoing agreement to participate in sexual activity. Each person involved is responsible for ensuring that there is active consent to engage in each sexual act.
Active consent is not:
o Silence
o Lack of protest
o Lack of resistance
o Assumed to exist based on a past or current sexual, dating or marital relationship
Legislation for New South Wales, Australia
It’s difficult to properly define and comprehend NSW, Australia’s definition of what constitutes Consent. Here is the wording from NSW proposed legislation. It has been mandated with changes possibly making it worse. This legislation appears to have been written by Rape victims and/or Radical Feminists, accepted by vote buying politicians. It appears to have had zero input from any married couples, legitimate Men’s Groups, sex therapists or Non-Feminist psychologists. This is now consent;
- consent must be present at the time of the sexual activity
- a person may withdraw consent, by words or conduct, at any time before or during the sexual activity
- a lack of physical or verbal resistance does not itself mean that there is consent
- consent to a particular sexual activity does not, of itself, mean there is consent to any other sexual activity
- consent to a sexual activity with a person at one time does not, of itself, mean there is consent to the activity at another time
- consent to a sexual activity with one person does not, of itself, mean there is consent to sexual activity with any other person, and
- consent to a sexual activity being performed in a particular way does not, of itself, mean there is consent to the activity being performed in a different way.
The list should provide that a person does not consent if the person:
- does not do or say anything to communicate consent
- does not have the capacity to consent
- is so affected by alcohol or another drug as to be incapable of consenting
- is asleep or unconscious
- participates because:
- of force, fear of force, or fear of harm to themselves, another person, an animal or property, regardless of when the force or conduct giving rise to the fear occurs
- of coercion, blackmail or intimidation
- the person, or another person, is unlawfully detained, or
- the person is overborne by the abuse of a position of authority or trust
- participates because the person is mistaken about:
- the identity of the other person
- the nature of the sexual activity, or
- the purpose of the sexual activity (including about whether the sexual activity is for health, hygienic or cosmetic purposes), or
- is fraudulently induced to participate in the sexual activity.
New Laws just passed in NSW and Tas Australia effectively make every normal behaviour sexual encounter illegal, especially between married couples. The new legislation outlaws most conventional and kinky Good Sex practices between most if not all happily married couples as well as normal singles sexual practices.
Further to this list making most couple’s sex illegal, false allegations about the italicised items can’t be defended.
With the confusion around permissible alcohol or drugs levels inhibiting the ability to consent in the NSW legislation, it must be regarded that even a single standard drink renders a female incapable of consent, until further clarification is made to the law.
This legislation has clearly been written based in Duluth Model control as promoted by Radical Feminism which completely places all responsibility for everything upon males and excuses all females of any responsibility for anything. There is no possibility this legislation will not fuel thousands upon thousands of false sexual assault charges. No male can possibly defend against a female simply stating “I didn’t say no but I didn’t want him to shift positions” or ” Yes, I was moaning loudly as the neighbors reported but it was a moan of displeasure not a moan of approval” . This legislation renders any male participating in sex defenceless, even with written agreement.
So what does constitute Active Consent?
Clearly, no-one knows for certain. This is one presenter’s opinion of what constitutes permission. This demonstration doesn’t meet the requirements. Clear agreement is not specifically stated to each physical activity. This presentation is great for demonstrating what good early relationship communication looks like, but it’s definitely NOT legal permission.
From various things I’ve read the primary consideration is that each individual female gets to decide, at any given time what constitutes consent and exactly what actions require consent on any particular day. Furthermore, it appears females now have the choice to withdraw consent AFTER sex has occurred. There appear to be many many cases where consent is clearly believed to be given however, after later consideration, for a multitude of reasons, withdrawn. There seems to be no limitation of the time consent can be withdrawn, even 30+ years has proven realistic to withdraw consent according to #BeleiveHer and #MeToo. I must pose the question why the law isn’t reversed? Why are females not subject to the same request and permission seeking processes, or are they. Worldwide, those movements have destroyed many high level careers with unproven allegations consent wasn’t granted.
If equality is our legal status, every man who is subject to these rules must immediately commence complaints because there will never be a female behave like this consistently, obtaining your consent.
To negate the risk of sexual assault charges Males MUST record in a proveable manner the female had not been drinking or under the influence of drugs. Many presenters are using your legal ability to drive as the benchmark to give consent. Remember, An Australian P-Plate driver is considered incapable of driving above a Blood Alcohol Content (BAC) of 0.00. It appears to be Male only responsibility to know if females have consumed alcohol and know her Blood Alcohol Content (BAC) to be at or below whatever local allowance for female accountability. The question must be posed if the law applies to both genders and why? We require clarification, with justification.
Males WILL be held accountable if a female’s BAC is even “possibly above” that range or if she has ingested drugs, regardless of whether the male saw her drinking or taking drugs.
To reduce the risk of sexual assault charges Males MUST record in a proveable manner the female has given Active Consent for every sexual action performed and did not retract it. As per the video above, the consent must be both Enthusiastic and Specific. Until case law precedent shows otherwise, consent starts with and must include:
- May I hold your hand?
- May I stroke your hair?
- May I touch your face?
- May I rub your shoulders?
- May I rub your back?
- May I massage your feet?
- May I rub your legs?
- May I Cuddle you?
- May I kiss you?
- May I remove (each article of clothing)? individually
- May I remove my own clothing?
- May I rub my body against yours?
- May I touch your breasts?
- May I kiss or Lick your breasts?
- May I touch your genitals?
- May I kiss or Lick your genitals?
- May I rub my Penis on your Breasts?
- May I Rub my penis on your buttocks while spooning?
- May I place my penis in your mouth?
- May I have Vaginal missionary intercourse with you?
- May I change to Doggy style Vaginal intercourse with you?
- May I have Anal intercourse with you?
- May I ejaculate in your mouth/vagina/anus?
- May I ejaculate on your stomach/breasts/face/buttocks?
An enthusiastic confirmation of “YES” must be proveable to every action, switch, change or speed alteration.
This IS CONSENT. This consent procedure MUST be followed in it’s entirety on every single sexual encounter, every single time you engage in intimacy. If you’re holding your partner’s hand and have let it go, if you wish to hold it again, you MUST re-obtain permission according to these rules. The same is to be said for a second round of oral or intercourse of course.
With 45 years of sexual activity, including a share of partners. Not once has a female asked permission to kiss me, let alone to touch my one-eyed Trouser snake. I’ve never enthusiastically given specific permission once. Does that mean every one of those females can now be charged with sexual assault? I’d really love to know how the Feminist movement would react if men start making complaints. Not one female I’ve been intimate with would be in a better position than Christian Porter was in when his life was deliberately destroyed. The law must be equal.
As a responsible Modern Male, it is now up to you to PROVE you not only had consent but, consent had not been withdrawn AND the female was fully sober (drugs and alcohol) at the time. Consent appears to be withdrawn after the event many times more often than before any occurrences. I must pose the question if the law is applicable to females? Men are demanding equality is confirmed in this legislation.
Under these new Consent protocols, Females are immediately victims, men are automatically offenders if you don’t follow every part of these procedures completely, keeping proveable records. This level of consent certainly includes intimacy within a marriage. It is understood these new Consent protocols mean Females are not responsible for their own sobriety levels and are not deemed competent to use the word “NO” or “STOP” if they want to stop. Males MUST telepathically know the Female wants to stop even if she does not state it. Remember Silence is not permission, even if the female likes silence, so if she is not actively saying “YES” to each specific act, at the exact time, men will be convicted of Sexual Assault or Rape.
I would recommend agreeing with your partner to sound recording all sexual interactions prior to commencing. If your partner can’t understand the need to protect yourself against such unilateral life destroying laws, choose another partner or walk away. It is that simple. This is the price females must pay for Radical Feminism indoctrination.
Whilst Covert sound recording may be illegal in many juresdictions, the penalties would be virtually nothing compared to the cost and damage including career and reputational destruction of a sexual assault charge. I would recommend checking the laws in your region. I strongly recommend keeping these records backed up in multiple locations. At a minimum, cloud based systems are advised or just theft of your phone or recorder leaves you defenceless.
This is the end of any form of kinky sex being legal. Historically, Safe-Words (maybe “Purple Gorilla”) were agreed by partners to stop various forms of sex play such as Rough, Spanking, Rape Fantasy, Bondage, etc. between enthusiastic consenting adults. Safe-Words allowed the “Play Victim” to be saying “No, No” and “Stop” as part of the Role Play. Today, this type of sex play appears completely illegal and would be suicidal stupidity for Males to participate without prior written consent.
Being charged with Sexual Assault will not only cost tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars to defend, it will almost certainly end your study and career, especially where reputation is of importance in your field. It will certainly cause more stress and anxiety than you’ve ever understood for at least 2 to 5 years.
If you don’t think this is crucial, have a chat with Christian Porter, our former Attorney-General, whose career was recently destroyed by a completely unevidenced accusation of an event over 30 years prior. In his case, he clearly states very credibly, the entire event was nothing like the fabricated version. He was a Top Prize scalp for the “Believe Her” movement. With Christian, the Radical Feminist movement proved any target could be bagged without evidence or proof. Zero evidence supported the claims made 30 years later but his ass is grass. Christian would almost certainly have become Prime Minister.
Non-Radical Feminist ladies and Gents, if this level of consent and sexual repetition and predictability is what you want for your sex life, every single time, with every single partner, for the rest of your life, keep allowing this Radical Feminist consent narrative to grow.
If you, as a Female don’t have the ability or confidence to say NO, maybe you should, as an Equality based Female, not be participating in Boombaroomba at all. Part of Females being Equal to Males is to take and exercise Equal responsibility for your position and actions.
I’m all for consent but treating females as incapable to say NO or to be responsible for their own actions shows them as completely unworthy of equality status. If females are not responsible when having consumed alcohol or drugs this cements guaranteed COMPLETE INEQUALITY in every respect to males. Again, men pose the question if the law equally applied and demand reasoning?
It’s my experience that most females absolutely want total confidence they can stop any action at any time they see fit, and so they should, however, it’s also very heavily my experience most females don’t want a man that doesn’t learn how to read her feelings and act accordingly. My experience shows very clearly most females are put off by men continually asking permission, especially after the first few encounters. Don’t take my word for it, even Lorna Campbell can tell you!
As unpopular as this statement will be to Hard-Core Feminists, both experience and science shows most females, of nearly all species, strongly prefer strong, decisive, confident males that don’t ask permission, as long the female confidently knows they can say “NO” and be respected.
It’s my firm belief that pushing this unworkable level of consent is worse than continually lowering speed limits. The driver who obeys the speed limit is the only one who slows. They were not the driver likely to have the accident. The driver that does 70kmh in a 40kmh zone will still do 70kmh even if you set the limit at 20kmh. The speeding driver is the person that needs to be stopped, not the compliant driver. No matter how tightly you write consent laws, they won’t stop a genuine rapist. This will simply destroy our judicial system with innumerable cases even where men have genuinely tried to comply. If anything, the complete contempt it will cause for women is more likely to just segregate us. The big difference is it’s not a 10 year sentence or several hundred thousand dollar defence bill for speeding!
Finally, a message to Females, I understand, especially while young, inexperienced, with a new partner and/or your partner lacks experience, the level of assurance demonstrated in the text and videos is very reassuring. When you have learned to understand your partner’s likes, dislikes and moods, and Non-Verbal communication, this level of questioning will completely annihilate the experience for all involved.
In the real world, these protocols are completely unworkable even in a single encounter let alone over a lifetime relationship. It would be completely illegal to make love to a shy female. Shy females just don’t behave anything like this, ever.
Reality Check
As far as expecting every person to behave like the bullshit permission videos above, it can never happen. I can’t speak for other people’s experience, but I’ve never had a long term partner behave anything like that even 3 months after you start “Nocturnal Calisthenics”. That’s not saying females never remain enthusiastic, on the contrary! Individuals and couples have their own individual “language of love” (sexual behaviours). Some people even like to be the motionless starfish because they like all the attention being lavished on them. I had a partner tell me this was her ideal, she didn’t want to talk or concentrate on what I wanted. I never worked out why, but it sure worked for her. Again, even though it’s her legitimate choice, by definition, that’s now RAPE!
Sinister motifs?
After reading substantial quantities of Feminist material whilst researching this site’s content, my suspicions are extremely high there are ulterior motifs behind the massive confusion, lack of clear definition and complication attached to Active Consent rules. Rules need to be clear and comprehensible, providing clarity for application and fairness. Rules MUST reflect the values and behaviour in society. These Active Consent rules do the exact opposite.
These rules have clearly been created by Radical Feminist groups in line with their Male persecuting Duluth Model, with no input from Men’s groups or Non-Feminist psychologists or sex counsellors balancing values or fairness. These rules are clearly written to remove every element of physical evidence from being required for conviction. It is a clear and stated aim of Radical Feminism to remove all barriers to Rape conviction, ensuring Female allegations convict. These rules will assure these goals are achieved.
Under these rules, consent can clearly be stated to be withdrawn days, weeks or even years after the event. With all of the education, nearly every Western World female knows they only need to say they were alcohol affected, drug affected, state they were not actively saying yes enthusiastically during every single part of the interaction and a conviction is very easily achieved. They can even admit they pre-loaded on drugs or alcohol before going to a boys room, demanding sex and because they were alcohol affected, Sexual Assault still stands.
In terms of credibility, under these rules, at least 98% of all sexual encounters worldwide, especially within marriages, would constitute Rape or Sexual Assault. The Feminist movement has long been complaining the Rape/Sexual Assault conviction rate is too low. These rules weaponise all sexual encounters, any time any female feels aggrieved or wants to shift responsibility for her choices. Convictions will be assured if a female can appear convincing in saying she simply “went quiet”.
Why would credibility be so high for the complainant? Seriously, think about your own sexual experiences. It’s human nature for the majority of people to be quiet in anticipation of oral contact or penetration, concentrating on the physical feelings. As penetration occurs, at least sometimes, more so during slow, gentle lovemaking, quietly concentrating on your partner is very common.
Most likely, it’s more common than the Hollywood or Pornography vocalised versions of sex glamorised on the silver screen. At other times, privacy with kids in the next room, being in a tent camping etc force you to “Operate in Silent mode”. All a female has to do is say consent was withdrawn with silence on just one occasion and you get to spend many years in the Big House, being Bubba’s bitch, unless you’re John Cena, then Bubba becomes your Bunny!
Why were these rules formulated and forced into universities, NSW and Tasmania with ZERO consultation with Men’s Activist groups, neutral sex therapists or neutral psychologists to prevent this ludicrous bias? How can Feminism demand such unilateral control? This, by definition, is Fascism.
Outcomes of these rules
As I said right at the beginning, be careful what you demand. Once the convictions start flowing, the only men that will let you near them will be men with no impulse control. Those men will almost certainly have very few assets and unstable earning capacity. Even men over 50 are already realising the risks massively outweigh the benefits. I guarantee, most men are just about as happy spending their money on toys, internet, Moisturiser and Huge screen TV’s instead of risking female attachment.
The saddest part is the price paid by Good Quality, Honest, Fair Dinkum ladies. Excellent ladies are now sentenced to a solitary life because of the hidden agendas and power grabs of the Hard Left Radical Feminists pulling societies strings. Men can’t tell who to trust. You know you were wrong while Bubba watches you making your phone call.
These laws have become so inequitable and divisive, I now, won’t allow an unchaperoned female on my property. I don’t want to waste time and resources fighting potential cases. I’d like to repartner but not in Australia. I don’t want to spend years preparing Affidavits, finding witnesses, collating forensics, paying for Expert Evidence or paying cash Blackmail money, etc. to clear allegations like Porter suffered. After experiencing 5-6 years of legal strangulation in the “Royal Women’s Family Court”, then spending a further 10 years fighting CSA appeal after CSA appeal. I know systemic and judicial bias. Western world men do.
The only possible safeguard I can see now, under these laws, is to never be in isolation with any female I don’t trust. This means I’ll never partner in Australia. I accept that consequence. So do many of my quality male friends. Ironically, my female friends agree. It’s simple Math, see;
No matter how many promises are offered these attacks will never be levelled at you, how can you ever believe when your entire life’s earnings, assets, reputation and physical freedom are at stake based on nothing more than an easy lie. The financial incentives, let alone outright Blackmail opportunities are just too high. The big SJW lawyers stirring up these cases know how to convince potential clients they’re right to attack. Now, good women lose.
How does 12% of society destroy it for 88%. Trust is gone. Radical Feminism took it