Talk:Sexual consent/Archive 1

This should be its own page, not a redirect.
IMO to have this page redirect to "Age of consent" is absurd. AOC is only one of many factors involved in consent. Others include permission, whether drugs or alcohol was present, etc.

See my comments on the "Age of consent" talk page, as well. toll_booth (talk) 03:01, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

OnBeyondZebrax, why did you feel that this needed its own article? For a topic like this, it is simply called "consent." Typically anyway. Not "sexual consent." In one part of the article, "age of sexual consent" is used...but this is simply called "age of consent" in the vast majority of reliable sources. That stated, I know that you copied and pasted that from the Consent article. Also see what Jytdog and Pmedema [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Consent&oldid=817217995#Why_is_discussion_of_consent/sexual_here? stated] at Talk:Consent about covering this topic at the Consent (criminal law) article. Either way, I don't think we should be stating "sexual consent" when reliable sources usually don't use that wording. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 11:53, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

Then again, I do see that enough sources in the article use "sexual consent" or similar. So that helps. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 11:57, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

One more thing that I want to note is that I don't think this article should be pipelinkd with the word "consent" when we are trying to inform readers of what we meant by consent with regard to sexual activity. With the way the article currently is, readers would be taken to the lead sentence that simply uses the word "consent" but does not define what it is because that lead sentence is focused on a subset of consent. So the linking would be circular. Readers are much better off being linked to the Consent article when it comes to defining rape or sexual assault. Then "sexual consent" can be mentioned/linked in some other way, as an additional link. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 02:26, 10 June 2018 (UTC)


 * @OnBeyondZebrax I think this is a valuable addition to Wikipedia. Thanks for your work.AnaSoc (talk) 01:12, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

Too much quoting
Per WP:Quotefarm and WP:Copyright concerns, the quoting needs to be toned down. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 09:35, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I am working to eliminate excessive use of quotes. OnBeyondZebrax • TALK 22:12, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

Unwanted sex v. coerced sex in the lead
Unwanted sex is not always an appropriate synonym for sexual assault or rape. There are several academic journal articles that differentiate between sexual assault/rape and unwanted sex. This one, for example, explains why men consent to sex that is unwanted, but is not coercive. Quinn-Nilas, C, Goncalves, M, Grant, A, & Kennett, D 2018, 'A thematic analysis of men's sexual compliance with unwanted, non-coercive sex', Psychology Of Men And Masculinity, 19, 2, p. 203-211. I will scout around my library a bit in the hopes of clarifying the two concepts, especially as they are related to the concept of Sexual consent.AnaSoc (talk) 01:39, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
 * AnaSoc, that "unwanted sexual activity" is not always an appropriate synonym for sexual assault or rape doesn't take away from the fact that it usually is a synonym for those things. This is where WP:Due weight comes in. An Unwanted sex article, for example, would be an unnecessary WP:Content fork. We should lead with the most common definition first. That "unwanted sexual activity" doesn't always equate to sexual assault or rape is something that should be covered lower in the article in a Terminology section. As for the lead, the most it should state is that "unwanted sexual activity" does not always mean rape or other sexual assault. We don't give undue weight to the minority of the literature.


 * Gandydancer and EvergreenFir, any thoughts on this? Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 03:08, 16 July 2018 (UTC)


 * With this edit (followup edit here), I added, "People may also consent to unwanted sexual activity. Unwanted sexual activity can involve rape or other sexual assault, but it may also be distinguished from them." But it needs to be sourced. And "can involve" should be "usually involves" since "unwanted sexual activity" most often refers to rape and other sexual assault rather than sexual harassment or non-coercive sexual compliance. Rape and other sexual assault are very much noted as forms of unwanted sex. Sexual harassment is sometimes categorized under a broad definition of sexual assault, though. And, again, the lead is not the place to go into all of the unwanted sexual activity aspects. Per WP:Lead, the lead is meant to summarize. So an "Unwanted sexual activity " section, rather than a Terminology section, should be created lower in the article to accompany the lead noting the unwanted sexual activity aspects. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 03:59, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
 * AnaSoc, Flyer22 has spent a great deal of time working on this sort of topic and in my experience she is extremely knowledgeable. I'm in agreement with her suggestions in this exchange.  Gandydancer (talk) 15:21, 17 July 2018 (UTC)
 * The suggested edits clarify the issue to my satisfaction. The Quinn-Nilas et al. article would work fine as the source. Thanks for your work. AnaSoc (talk) 04:01, 22 July 2018 (UTC)
 * AnaSoc, we still need some kind of content explaining the matter lower in the article. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 23:51, 22 July 2018 (UTC)


 * Moved out of the lead, per what I stated above about there not being a section specifically addressing this. Also rearranged the article. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 08:14, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

As seen here (followup fix here), it now has its own section since OnBeyondZebrax is working on unwanted sex material in a sandbox. I still don't think unwanted sex should have its own Wikipedia article, but we'll see how things develop. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 11:20, 5 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Start with the basics, namely that WP is rife with terminology left unexplained because of "everyone knows what THAT means, duh!!" ineptitude. Here, looks like a matter of really basic English: It's possible (perhaps even common) to give assent without giving actual consent — "well… I suppose… maybe…" is nothing at all like "oh GOD yes, do me RIGHT NOW you beautiful stud!!!" even though both demonstrate "consent." (Weirdly, if predictably, "assent" appears but only twice and without explanation much less definition.)


 * It is not reliably true IRL that "yes means yes," and endlessly chanting an unsane mantra (the phrase appears like 38 [!!!] times) not only doesn't make it any more true, but flags it as weaselly if not outright propagandistic.


 * Unless someone can immediately come up with better usage (supported, of course) of consent and then explicitly clarify the (supposed) premises of Sexual consent, any deeper exploration of the topic is increasingly pointless with depth, and the topic rapidly becomes a coatrack. If anyone's got a cogent (rational, sane) countercase to that, let's see it.


 * And (having worked with victims of sexual assault), the premise of this Talk section is critically flawed. Namely, in our culture, someone who hears/reads the phrase "sexual assault" immediately focuses on the naughty word, sex, because violence is such an overt, accepted (entertainment, e.g., sports, MMA, TV dramas) part of daily life, so gets a pass. However, the fact is that rape (for example) is NOT a matter of sex, but of assault.


 * And THAT brings up the further difficulty: Few people grasp there's even any distinction between assault and battery, respectively threat/intimidation versus physical contact. It is elementary to assault someone without battering them, without even touching them. QED, if rape is "sexual assault" then either the term is baldly misleading OR rape can occur without physical contact. Parsing the term any further is clearly original research.


 * Given all that, I will refrain from pointing up all the ways in which this is a terrible article, and instead STRONGLY recommend it be reviewed by an actual JD or at least a relevant PhD. Weeb Dingle (talk) 17:27, 11 May 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm just going to state that rape is sexual assault. It is a form of sexual assault. If anyone has a problem with rape being an aspect of sexual assault, that person should take it up with the literature, including the legal literature. And we know that, despite the "rape is about power" aspect of the literature, some rapists have stated or shown that rape was about sex for them. And we see enough "about sex" cases with statutory rape. As for this article, I've already noted my issues with it above on this talk page (I mean the "too much quoting" aspect and the article being more essay-like than encyclopedic, including presenting arguments from random person after random person). And I never discuss my credentials on Wikipedia. And even if I did, the WP:Expert essay addresses some issues with seeking out expert opinion; I mainly see those issues with newbies, however. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 00:35, 12 May 2019 (UTC) Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 00:45, 12 May 2019 (UTC)