The importance of clarifying consent

At Princeton, where students are responsible for completing extensive educational courses on sexual assault before even enrolling in classes, and where student-run organizations dedicated to combating assault on campus abound, characterizing consent remains a touchy and controversial subject.

Although sexual assault victims don't always say no, they also don't always exude enthusiasm and affirmative interest. I have encountered peers who have shared this specific experience with me.

In a culture where men are lauded for procuring large numbers of sexual partners, too often the objective becomes to convince partners to engage rather than to honestly verify interest. Instead of seeking out a “yes,” the goal becomes to avoid a “no.”

California and New York made history last month with their unprecedented legislation of affirmative consent. Both states plan to implement affirmative consent rules in state-funded schools that underscore that sex is only consensual when both parties have actively said “yes,” These new rules aim not only to challenge how sexual assault is handled in court, but also to shift cultural norms to emphasize sex as mutually agreed upon and instigated.

Opponents of the new policy question how officials plan to legislate verbal consent. Will students face scrutiny for failing to verbally ask permission every time things escalate?

It’s important to remember that cases where both individuals are clearly interested typically aren’t the ones brought to the disciplinary board. Affirmative consent policy is about more than necessitating verbal cues. It’s about creating an environment where both parties are enthusiastic, willing participants. It’s about changing cultural norms to prioritize positive sex and reforming campus standards.

The University’s own policy already emphasizes affirmative and active consent. According to section 1.9.3, “Consensual sexual activity happens when each partner willingly and affirmatively chooses to participate.”

However, no single, all-encompassing definition of how this consent is to be expressed exists within the student body. Some students say they look for consent through body language, while others state they prefer to give consent verbally.

Opponents of verbal consent argue that “asking” ruins the moment: It’s unnecessary; You already know where things are leading from non-verbal cues; Movies and TV shows popularize consent given through body language; Ryan Gosling isn’t stopping mid-make out to ask Rachel McAdams permission.

However, in reality expectations are a bit different than Hollywood would have us believe. In a study reported by the University of Arkansas, only 10 percent of female students stated they gave consent through body language while 61 percent of male students said they inferred consent through body language. Additionally, 51 percent of female students stated they gave consent verbally while only 9 percent of male students said they received consent that way.

Because individuals have varying expectations–and as these statistics imply, miscommunication happens fairly frequently–maybe it does make sense to ask. There are times when attaining consent solely from presumed physical cues might not be sufficient.

Get the best of ‘the Prince’ delivered straight to your inbox. Subscribe now »

Of course, the real aim of affirmative consent legislation is to promote a culture in which each partner is attuned to the other’s interest; how they get there may vary. What’s important is to cultivate awareness of the importance of actively looking for the “yes” and of expressly asking when there’s uncertainty.

Nobody wants to have sex reluctantly. Nobody wants to engage in intimacy simply to avoid name-calling. Conversely, nobody should want to have sex with someone who’s grudgingly consented. If you’re not concerned with whether your partner’s enjoying it, what are you thinking about?

Julia Case-Levine is a freshman from New York, N.Y. She can be reached at juliacc@princeton.edu.