why the sexual revolution makes "consent" nearly impossible

[Magical Apple]

If a woman only wants sex if a man if and only if he loves her but the man feigns emotion to get sex is that consent?

What about a man who will only have sex with a woman who is loyal to him but she is cheating and hides it.

Or how about a man who creates a completely fake persona to get women to have sex with him.

You see the problem here? Before the sexual revolution, there were clearly defined situations where people could "properly" consent to sex and thus consent was determined by circumstance rather than feeling. If sex was done in appropriate situation then one need not suffer negative psychological repercussions. Now, consent is defined by supposed "free choice" which in practice can be easily manipulated. This is the cause of the moral panic about sex in the western world. Because consent is now so hard to determine, even to peoples own psyches, they are left feeling violated from their sexual relationships.


To be ignorant and to be deceived are two different things. To be ignorant is to be a slave of the world. To be deceived is to be the slave of another man. The question will always be: Why, when all men are ignorant, and therefore already slaves, why does this latter slavery sting us so?”

Even more fundamentally, if ones decisions are merely a product of their circumstances and biological impulses, how can one "consent" to anything? The irony is that people have thrown away previous ideas about sexual morality only to create a far worse problem.

@Vermilioncore

 

[Vermilioncore]

Chad fuck, I rot

 

[AlexAP]

JFL what a cope. If she says firmly "No" (not in a playful way, you have to be a Giga-autist to not notice the difference) or if she pushes you away, there is no consent. All other situations are regret, but not rape/harassment.

 

[ray]

not to mention she can take back that consent any time she wants and call u a rapist. it sux to even be a chad nowadays, so many ways u can get fukt over

 

[hebbewem]

not to mention she can take back that consent any time she wants and call u a rapist. it sux to even be a chad nowadays, so many ways u can get fukt over

Thats good and

 

[Deleted member 18086]

there is no consent. humans are forced to have sex by nature

 

[Magical Apple]

JFL what a cope. If she says firmly "No" (not in a playful way, you have to be a Giga-autist to not notice the difference) or if she pushes you away, there is no consent. All other situations are regret, but not rape/harassment.

That is obvious, but in the other situations there is no consent either. How can one "consent" if they have been deceived?

 

[AlexAP]

That is obvious, but in the other situations there is no consent either. How can one "consent" if they have been deceived?

Being deceived is not rape/harassment.

 

[Magical Apple]

Being deceived is not rape/harassment.

Is Sex by Deception a Form of Rape? (Published 2019)

Laws are seeking to elucidate the problem of “rape by fraud.”

www.nytimes.com

The thing is, it legally can be prosecuted as such.

 

[NuclearBrainReturns]

The only problem with "consent" is women retracting it after the situation occurred. That particular aspect needs to be dismantled in law. Imagine, I go to the bank and ask for a £10,000 loan. I get the loan, spend it and then go back to the bank and ask them to write off the loan because I regret taking the money out. Imagine now that by law, the bank has to write off my debts because I decided I didn't want to pay it. It would be p cool but it would be exploited and be completely unsustainable.

Now, most people would pay the loan because they are good natured and there is a sense of honour in paying back your debts to someone. But, a shit ton of people would be taking out billion dollar loans and then trying to write them off.

That aspect of consent is very similar. Most girls won't do that sort of thing but a lot of them will.

But I disagree that consent itself is hard to define. It is incredibly easy to define "in the moment" if a girl likes you enough to fuck or not. I guess that might just show you are inexperienced.

 

[Magical Apple]

The only problem with "consent" is women retracting it after the situation occurred. That particular aspect needs to be dismantled in law. Imagine, I go to the bank and ask for a £10,000 loan. I get the loan, spend it and then go back to the bank and ask them to write off the loan because I regret taking the money out. Imagine now that by law, the bank has to write off my debts because I decided I didn't want to pay it. It would be p cool but it would be exploited and be completely unsustainable.

Now, most people would pay the loan because they are good natured and there is a sense of honour in paying back your debts to someone. But, a shit ton of people would be taking out billion dollar loans and then trying to write them off.

That aspect of consent is very similar. Most girls won't do that sort of thing but a lot of them will.

But I disagree that consent itself is hard to define. It is incredibly easy to define "in the moment" if a girl likes you enough to fuck or not. I guess that might just show you are inexperienced.

I believe that a complex moral code defining when sex is appropriate is necessary for a society to protect people from predatory behavior. This needs to go beyond something as arbitrary as "consent."
@AlexAP

 

[hebbewem]

The only problem with "consent" is women retracting it after the situation occurred. That particular aspect needs to be dismantled in law. Imagine, I go to the bank and ask for a £10,000 loan. I get the loan, spend it and then go back to the bank and ask them to write off the loan because I regret taking the money out. Imagine now that by law, the bank has to write off my debts because I decided I didn't want to pay it. It would be p cool but it would be exploited and be completely unsustainable.

Now, most people would pay the loan because they are good natured and there is a sense of honour in paying back your debts to someone. But, a shit ton of people would be taking out billion dollar loans and then trying to write them off.

That aspect of consent is very similar. Most girls won't do that sort of thing but a lot of them will.

But I disagree that consent itself is hard to define. It is incredibly easy to define "in the moment" if a girl likes you enough to fuck or not. I guess that might just show you are inexperienced.

The first part dont happen

 

[Deleted member 16039]

JFL what a cope. If she says firmly "No" (not in a playful way, you have to be a Giga-autist to not notice the difference) or if she pushes you away, there is no consent. All other situations are regret, but not rape/harassment.

If a 40 year old man sweet talks a 10 year old girl online and she likes the attnetion, what is it?

"harassment".

If you wann say "she's too young to know, the you know what, sure. but if we want to be honest, is it forcibale rape? no

so how do you define it? inappropriate?

 

[Magical Apple]

If a 40 year old man sweet talks a 10 year old girl online and she likes the attnetion, what is it?

"harassment".

If you wann say "she's too young to know, the you know what, sure. but if we want to be honest, is it forcibale rape? no

so how do you define it? inappropriate?

Because the real reason harassing kids is hated isn't about "consent." Despite what normies claim, It is because it is fucking inappropriate. The problem is that society conditions kids to listen to adults unquestionably and thus fucking kids is a disgraceful abuse of position/ power. One of the core principles of an honorable society is that kids can for the most part trust adults to have their best interest in mind and not use them for their personal gain. Even though in practice it isn't always true it is amazing that for the most part it is true.

It is the same reason a boss fucking his employees is inappropriate. This is why the age of consent in most places is 15 or 16. Socially this is the age that most people become adults and no longer are in a position of forced deference. You are an autistic idiot who doesn't understand shit. The idea of kids getting fucked is horrifying to people the same way a despotic dictator is.

 

[stamaster21]

If a woman only wants sex if a man if and only if he loves her but the man feigns emotion to get sex is that consent?

What about a man who will only have sex with a woman who is loyal to him but she is cheating and hides it.

Or how about a man who creates a completely fake persona to get women to have sex with him.

You see the problem here? Before the sexual revolution, there were clearly defined situations where people could "properly" consent to sex and thus consent was determined by circumstance rather than feeling. If sex was done in appropriate situation then one need not suffer negative psychological repercussions. Now, consent is defined by supposed "free choice" which in practice can be easily manipulated. This is the cause of the moral panic about sex in the western world. Because consent is now so hard to determine, even to peoples own psyches, they are left feeling violated from their sexual relationships.


To be ignorant and to be deceived are two different things. To be ignorant is to be a slave of the world. To be deceived is to be the slave of another man. The question will always be: Why, when all men are ignorant, and therefore already slaves, why does this latter slavery sting us so?”

Even more fundamentally, if ones decisions are merely a product of their circumstances and biological impulses, how can one "consent" to anything? The irony is that people have thrown away previous ideas about sexual morality only to create a far worse problem.

@Vermilioncore

I love this post, now laws about sexual assualt is based feelings, after the sexual act, its not based on consent. Before consent in the court of law was based on if both parties agreed to the sexual acts and went along with it. Now if a drunk guy and drunk women has sex, she can say said man raped her and took advantage of her, she can say she didnt want it, and her female friends will have her go to the police and file rape charges. And the simp court judges will play stupid and go along with it because they don't want social backlash to ruin their careers.

Sexual assult /rape has now is NOT about sexual consent anymore its about the feelings of the women after the sexual act is done, Women can literally come back years or decades later, and think back on the act, and think she was used and say it was rape. sexuall/assult now is a women feeling used/abused or not getting what she wants after a sexual act.

 

[stamaster21]

The only problem with "consent" is women retracting it after the situation occurred. That particular aspect needs to be dismantled in law. Imagine, I go to the bank and ask for a £10,000 loan. I get the loan, spend it and then go back to the bank and ask them to write off the loan because I regret taking the money out. Imagine now that by law, the bank has to write off my debts because I decided I didn't want to pay it. It would be p cool but it would be exploited and be completely unsustainable.

Now, most people would pay the loan because they are good natured and there is a sense of honour in paying back your debts to someone. But, a shit ton of people would be taking out billion dollar loans and then trying to write them off.

That aspect of consent is very similar. Most girls won't do that sort of thing but a lot of them will.

But I disagree that consent itself is hard to define. It is incredibly easy to define "in the moment" if a girl likes you enough to fuck or not. I guess that might just show you are inexperienced.

I agree consent is a easy thing, did both parties willing do the sexual acts and go along with it, simple as that. Now its turned into feelings, and if the women felt taken advantage of or had feelings of regret after. Some women cheat on their boyfriends/husbands and cry rape. Notice how if two drunk adults have sex, the women can file charges for rape but the man cannot.

 

[Deleted member 16039]

Because the real reason harassing kids is hated isn't about "consent." Despite what normies claim, It is because it is fucking inappropriate. The problem is that society conditions kids to listen to adults unquestionably and thus fucking kids is a disgraceful abuse of position/ power. One of the core principles of an honorable society is that kids can for the most part trust adults to have their best interest in mind and not use them for their personal gain. Even though in practice it isn't always true it is amazing that for the most part it is true.

It is the same reason a boss fucking his employees is inappropriate. This is why the age of consent in most places is 15 or 16. Socially this is the age that most people become adults and no longer are in a position of forced deference. You are an autistic idiot who doesn't understand shit. The idea of kids getting fucked is horrifying to people the same way a despotic dictator is.

1. i understand a 40 and a 10 is inappropriate, my question should have made that obvious retard
2. why was aoc 12 for most of history? 16 is new you know. you need more than "retards in the past", because they built society.

also, another problem is that women fucking boys isnt seen as bad as adult men fucking girls. this shows a gender bias.

 

[Deleted member 16039]

The only problem with "consent" is women retracting it after the situation occurred. That particular aspect needs to be dismantled in law. Imagine, I go to the bank and ask for a £10,000 loan. I get the loan, spend it and then go back to the bank and ask them to write off the loan because I regret taking the money out. Imagine now that by law, the bank has to write off my debts because I decided I didn't want to pay it. It would be p cool but it would be exploited and be completely unsustainable.

Now, most people would pay the loan because they are good natured and there is a sense of honour in paying back your debts to someone. But, a shit ton of people would be taking out billion dollar loans and then trying to write them off.

That aspect of consent is very similar. Most girls won't do that sort of thing but a lot of them will.

But I disagree that consent itself is hard to define. It is incredibly easy to define "in the moment" if a girl likes you enough to fuck or not. I guess that might just show you are inexperienced.

if we're being blunt though, 12 year old girls can consent by your logic

its just that society has come to a social contract because most are parents to prevent adult men from getting "easy layups" (just made that up btw).

it would be a sinch for a man in his 20's to sweet talk a 12 year old girl to like him and fuck him with agreement. but most dads would feel cucked by this, so society has made it illegal

and this includes just getting your dick sucked and not risking pregnancy

 

[Magical Apple]

1. i understand a 40 and a 10 is inappropriate, my question should have made that obvious retard
2. why was aoc 12 for most of history? 16 is new you know. you need more than "retards in the past", because they built society.

also, another problem is that women fucking boys isnt seen as bad as adult men fucking girls. this shows a gender bias.

Because 12 year olds are stuck in a shit middle school and pretty much given 0 personal autonomy these days. Its not some "biology" problem it is a legal and cultural issue. Giving someone the ability to fuck you when you have pretty much 0 ability to say no to anything else they tell you is just horrifying in the eyes of most people. Back in the old days you were an adult at puberty, especially in middle eastern culture and thus were no longer constrained by the rules that children were. At 16 you are a defacto adult in most developed countries which is why it is the age of consent.

Fucking = putting your dick or an object in someone and it is considered worse than getting fucked. Allthough both are considered innapropriate in that context.

 

[Magical Apple]

if we're being blunt though, 12 year old girls can consent by your logic

its just that society has come to a social contract because most are parents to prevent adult men from getting "easy layups" (just made that up btw).

it would be a sinch for a man in his 20's to sweet talk a 12 year old girl to like him and fuck him with agreement. but most dads would feel cucked by this, so society has made it illegal

and this includes just getting your dick sucked and not risking pregnancy

Its to prevent disgusting abuse of power. People want to feel safe knowing that no one can use position to violate and practically enslave their children you fucking moron.

 

[Deleted member 16039]

Because 12 year olds are stuck in a shit middle school and pretty much given 0 personal autonomy these days. Its not some "biology" problem it is a legal and cultural issu. Giving someone the ability to fuck you when you have pretty much 0 ability to say no to anything else they tell you is just horrifying in the eyes of most people. Back in the old days you were an adult at puberty, especially in middle eastern culture and thus were no longer constrained by the rules that children were. At 16 you are a defacto adult in most developed countries which is why it is the age of consent.

Fucking = putting your dick or an object in someone and it is considered worse than getting fucked. Allthough both are considered innapropriate in that context.

you just said consent isnt the issue,

now you're backpedaling

 

[Deleted member 16039]

Its to prevent disgusting abuse of power. People want to feel safe knowing that no one can use position to violate and practically enslave their children you fucking moron.

lol, so sex = enslavement?

why are you so retarded?

 

[Magical Apple]

lol, so sex = enslavement?

why are you so retarded?

you just said consent isnt the issue,

now you're backpedaling

It doesnt matter if they consent or not it is still shameful. Stfu pedo

 

[hebbewem]

It doesnt matter if they consent or not it is still shameful. Stfu pedo

It sounds like you are talking about consent

 

[Magical Apple]

It sounds like you are talking about consent

im saying that having sex in that situation is degrading and disgraceful for them and their family according to society. Which is why it is illegal, even if they consent.

 

[hebbewem]

im saying that having sex in that situation is degrading and disgraceful for them and their family according to society. Which is why it is illegal, even if they consent.

Kids can’t consent and you talk about enslavement and abuse of power and those things are about consent

 

[Deleted member 18063]

Kids can’t consent and you talk about enslavement and abuse of power and those things are about consent

what is the minimum age one can consent?

 

[Beetlejuice]

Chad fuck, I rot