A challenge for everyone to think through their sexual behavior and ask themselves, “Is this ethical?”.
Consider the following scenario: Lucy and Tom meet each other at a bar. They begin drinking and flirting. As the bar closes, Lucy suggests they go back to her place. In the taxi they begin making out. They arrive at Lucy’s place and Lucy pours them both another drink. They begin making out again. Tom asks “do you want to do it?” and Lucy replies “Uh-huh, but do you have a condom?” Tom removes a condom from his wallet and puts it on. They begin having sex. Tom is now feeling the effects of the alcohol and is having difficulty maintaining an erection. He reaches beneath the covers and removes the condom. In the dark, Lucy doesn’t notice. Tom continues having sex with Lucy. Now consider this scenario: Alex and Lee are dating. It’s Alex’s birthday and Lee decides to surprise Alex by booking an expensive restaurant followed by a night at a hotel room. Alex is really touched by Lee’s gesture but doesn’t really feel like having sex. Despite this, Alex is worried that saying ‘No’ would disappoint Lee and may even lead to an argument. Alex and Lee have sex.
◊♦◊
These are just two of many scenarios that will be discussed by students at Melbourne University this week as part of Rad(ical) Sex and Consent week. The point of the scenarios is not to debate the morality of one night stands or pre-martial sex (those are matters left up to the individual), but to discuss the legal and ethical complexities of negotiating consent. Other scenarios consider how a person might request a specific sexual activity while avoiding the use of pressure, the ethics of repeatedly topping up a person’s alcoholic beverage prior to sex, hook-ups which occur when a person can’t get home and is forced to crash at a friend’s place, the ethics of lying to a person in order to get them into bed, and what happens when a person changes their mind or loses interest during sex.
Students are also encouraged to consider more than just the legal consequences of their actions. After all, ‘unlawful’ and ‘unethical’ are different concepts, and just because an act may technically be legal, it doesn’t automatically follow that it is also ethical. As a case in point, I recently heard a story involving a young woman who had engaged in consensual sex with a semi-famous musician. The moment the sex was over he called her a ‘slag’ and told her to ‘piss off’. Was his conduct illegal? No. Unethical? You betcha.
◊♦◊
For many students, Rad Sex and Consent week represents the first real opportunity they have had to talk about sexual ethical dilemmas in a structured environment. Unfortunately, because most high-school sex education programs still tend to focus primarily on biology, puberty, reproduction and health risks associated with sex, many other important subjects go untouched, including intimacy, desire, consent, relationships and communication. The result is that students may be able to correctly locate and label a fallopian tube on a cross section diagram, but this does not mean they are adequately prepared to manage the complex world of relationships. Nor are they equipped to deconstruct pervasive cultural assumptions about sex, gender and dating. I was reminded of this recently, while researching my latest book for teens on intimacy and relationships. I was speaking to a group of Year 10 girls as they were debating what they would do if a boy pressured them to have sex. One girl commented that if “you’ve given a boy an erection, then you owe it to him to do it. Otherwise you’re just being a prick-tease.” I pointed out that a teen boy can get an erection from just about anything, including the bouncing of the bus (and does this mean the bus driver owes him sex?) and that no-one should ever have to do something sexual if they don’t want to. She looked relieved to hear this, and I felt sad that she clearly hadn’t been taught this before.
◊♦◊
Young people both need and are entitled to more comprehensive and sex-positive information. Too often girls are taught to adopt a defensive approach to sexuality while boys are taught view their sexuality as inherently dangerous and exploitative. This isn’t empowering for either gender. Nor is it helpful that so many sex education programs either ignore the needs of sexual minorities, or worse, pathologize the owners of those needs as deviant. It’s wonderful to see that some university students are being offered the opportunity to discuss sexual ethics and reflect on their personal values. Now for the next step: getting those conversations into schools.
—
Originally published on dailylife.com.au/news-and-views/ Find Nina on Twitter https://twitter.com/ninafunnell
— Photo by Becca Tapert on Unsplash
This should be a required course in high school.
Interesting typo at the end: “originally punished in ….” Is that a reference to all the stupid comments?
I’m just glad that I was brought up to be an independent, belligerent, strong woman who wouldn’t go near a bloke who would take the condom off half way through. And that a devious little, entitled, insect who behaves like that wouldn’t touch me with a lead lined barge pole. Be scary girls, you owe it to yourself. You are only scary/off limits to cheats, liars and people who probably have at least one STD. There’s real men out there who will adore you for it. STDs can change your whole life, if you can have kids, everything. They deserve… Read more »
You must go into more detail about how you being an abrasive bitch manages to only drive off people who are already assholes.
I have to say, I’m always astounded by the psychic powers women are purproted to posess that lets them tell ahead of time what kind of man they’re dealing with. Pity so many of them choose not to use them and end up in abusive relationships as a result.
Or we could accept the unorthodox idea that women are mere mortals just like men are, and that the same rules for human behavior apply to them.
What I appreciate in the first scenario is that it’s entirely possible that BOTH people do something that’s sexually unethical. It doesn’t have to be black-and-white or either/or. It doesn’t always break down nicely into perp and victim. Just because one partner is doing something unethical doesn’t mean the other person is ethical.
This is so important. A lot of times just reading about a scenario, the question of whether something is ethical seems obvious. And yet while a person is in the situation things may not be so clear. Thanks for shedding light on these issues.
Agreed. I thought this was an interesting read and was about to share it with friends when… I saw the comments. People upset because the author didn’t create an obvious female villain in her scenarios? Really? It seems to me that we’re justifying not having the discussion because we found a minor fault in the trigger. If you want to see flipped roles, flip ’em. Talk about that. But we can’t tear down the validity of this piece because the author neglected to represent a wide-enough array of sexual partners. Even if she had depicted a manipulative female… would we… Read more »
I definitely don’t think anyone on GMP is trying to make men feel even more villainous. But the goal here is to improve men, not to assuage bruised psyches with every published work. That’s harsh, but it’s true. This author is trying to help us think and talk… She did not write the piece to remind us that women predators can happen.. just like male predators. That’s a different (and also very interesting) article. This is larger than what’s happening on GMP. This is a talk aimed at getting a conversation going on sex. You say that the goal is… Read more »
@JJFarhat,
I firmly believe we coukd have had an interesting and giving discussion about, say, the value of given consent, enthusiastic or not, given under various stages of intoxication (by men and women alike), had the Picture not been splashed with a bucket of neonred paint to aim in another direction.
“People upset because the author didn’t create an obvious female villain in her scenarios? ”
In short yes… because an obvious male villain was presented and this is a stereotype.
Concern that this might be a recurring theme is warranted.
Yes we can make our own story’s but that is not the issue people are having.
I don’t want this to stop the conversation at all but yah it’s probably going to be soar spot for many people here.
Sorry if I’m overly focused on some minor wording, but the phrase “assuage bruised psyches” really jumped out at me. On the positive side, at least it said “psyche” instead of “ego,” so that’s definitely an improvement over much of the discourse about men’s feelings. I don’t know if this was intentional or not, but “bruised psyche” or “bruised ego” comes across as pretty dismissive. I don’t know why it’s so hard for people, men and women, to use the word “feelings” for men. Men don’t just have egos. We also have actual, real-life feelings, and if someone says something… Read more »
I call it ego when it gets in the way of other people’s right to feel or live. I have always said that men’s egos are destroying the world and people laughed at me. But when it comes down to the Montreal massacre in 1989 or the recent shootings where the perpetrators put their ‘damaged’ egos in charge of their hands where a gun is concerned (because of their hatred of women or feminism which they expressed over the years and during the shootings), I can’t help but feel like I have been proved right. When a man is trying… Read more »
I find it interesting that Nina posts example of scenarios designed to be starting points of conversations that will allow students to explore the many nuances of sex and ethics, and (as Nina points out) get away from the villain-and-victim thinking and focus more on all the situations where things are more complex and the many ways in which it’s helpful to ask yourself “is this a good idea” or “is my behaviour ethical” when dealing with sex. And what do we get in the reactions? A demand for scenarios where it’s clear that the woman is the bad guy.… Read more »
Hmm but I think the point being made is that the very first example that is a starting points of conversations that will allow students to explore the many nuances of sex and ethics… only has the man doing anything obviously unethical. Remember this was posted on a mens rights website and man men have something of a issue with the way they are seen as rapists in waiting. Right off the bat a soar spot has been hit and I do wonder if this is true in more/most of the examples that are to be used. Its like showing… Read more »
I have been thinking about the whole thing, and here are my conclusions: I believe it would all work to Nina’s plan if we, the readers, approached her examples with a blank slate state of mind. However, as it is, few readers arrive at this website that haven’t spent time on various feminist publications in the past and are thouroughly familiarized and infused with the theory and attitudes espoused there. For example, in Nina’s first example a blank slate observer might discuss whether maybe Lucy bears some responsibility for the situation by having made Tom drink more alcohol than he… Read more »
I do think it can be taken in good faith that this is not what is going on…. but if Nina really wanted to help put us at ease maybe another example might be called for?
Now to be fair she does say that those two scenarios are two of many that she plans to discuss this week.
Hi Lars,
I think you raise a fair point.
However, as anongirl points out, starting off a discussion like this with an example where an issue with a condom is “The blindingly obvious one” (quoted from Nina’s very first answer) has every potential to be put to rest just there.
“Alex and Lee are dating. It’s Alex’s birthday and Lee decides to surprise Alex by booking an expensive restaurant followed by a night at a hotel room. Alex is really touched by Lee’s gesture but doesn’t really feel like having sex. Despite this, Alex is worried that saying ‘No’ would disappoint Lee and may even lead to an argument. Alex and Lee have sex.” Ok lets look at this one. Ignoring genders here because they really are not important… but I would really really like to know how many have a the males as the primary unethical ones. We don’t… Read more »
My gender-theory professor says that all hetero-sex while drinking is rape.
Well, in the name of gender-theory at least the caveat of “while drinking” is somewhat reassuring, then…
Don’t do it while you’re drinking, because you might spill the drink. Some of those cocktails are damn expensive.
In your scenario #2 with Alex and Lee, what is really the ethical alternative? is it to have sex, or not to have sex, or is it to say no to the surprise (restaurant+hotel) altogether because you/we can’t really afford it…
And would the answer be different had the roles been reversed?
I guess the ethical alternative is always not to have sex — at least when you are a man. For a woman maybe the question does not even arise.
Whom do you see as having what role. The names are completely gender-neutral, given current naming trends in the U.S., and there are no other gender markers. I read this as a gay couple.
I think in even being able to ask your question, you are assuming something, probably something overly judgmental of men.
That is fascinating, and I actually overlooked that fact. Now on rereading it seems to me that the disguising of the person’s genders in the story is definitely not coincidental. I originally read Lee as male and concluded that therefore Alex would be female. Haha, caught us heteronormativin’. Good lesson.
And not just heteronormative. Ascribing the woman as a victim, either of her own weakness or of the man, but still the unfortunate party.
We need, in general, to resist seeing women as unfortunate victims without thinking of other interpretations. It lets them off the hook, and keeps men presumptively guilty and therefore more willing to commit crime.
Its time to challenge the cis gender-ed hetero-normative.
@Jon Jay Obermark
I never said what roles would be reversed. It could be the birthday person (upon learning about the surprise) really anticipating something that was totally void in the mind of the person making the reservations
So your assumptions about my assumptions may be overly judgemental as well… 😉
@Jon Jay Obermark, again.
But you were right. (though it doesn’t erase the dilemma in my previous post)
I guess I give away both my age and my nationality as not being up to par on current U.S. naming trends.
But I have a host of friends called Alex, and all of them are male, and Lee strikes me as a quite typical female name, so…
But it’s quite interesting that I totally reversed the gendered compared to Theorema Egregium’s interpretation?
Wow people! What Nina’s discussing here is so pertinent and valuable. She didn’t say the scenarios are set in stone. Like any good discussion, to thoroughly examine the context from different view points, a switching of roles is expected.
Personally,Nina, I think this is great. The execution has not been a failure and I hope the students will have real and thorough debate and discussion on these scenarios.
Taking this in good faith but I think a little more women as the baf guys would be refreshing… and might even get you different answers.
For sure it would have. Because it could have been a useful contribution: Putting in a level of offence between everything-alright and outright violent rape. We need that, because the popular assertion that everything that is not enthusiastical consent is effectively equivalent to rape at gunpoint on a dark street corner is seriously stifling the discussion. It is not conducive to make people consider whether the “yes” they received from their partner was truly enthusiastic enough or not, if the “not” automatically means they deserve, say, 20 years’ prison time, because they are guilty of “murder of the soul”. So… Read more »
I am still up for that conversation but it always ends the same way.
Also such a loaded topic is going to enrage people with accusations if being raped or being a rapist tossed around.
Anyway let me address the first one. First I do not find the use of booze before or with sex unethical unless it is being used in a predatory fashion. However even then I do not belivevthat is rape. For rape to happen the victims must not have meaningful agency.
Sorry got to run. Will add more when I have a free sec
I agree. We have wound up sex with enough fear that alcohol is actually almost necessary for a lot of people to address it in the right spirit. I can’t resent them that, and if it is play, you need to have some clear notion of responsibility. The one we have chosen *ABSOLUTELY EVERYWHERE ELSE* is that what you do while drunk should be judged pretty much just like you weren’t drunk, unless you are physically weakened or unconscious.
Ironically, the saying “Drunk Man tells No Lies” is spoken of Honestly Unfiltered when an Argument is occuring and Negative, Vile, and/or Hurtful Things are Said, possibly even “The Truth”……
So basically, overall, a Drunk Guy= Sober Guy Guilty of a Crime, but Drunk Woman= No Recollection= Always A Victim
I agree with your take. If we are going to explore sexual ethics properly, then the concept of “enthusiasm” must also be on the table for discussion. I believe it to be unethical to burden sexual behavior with the albatross of enthusiasm. Also, good ethical explorations must include personal agency so that the ethical burden is not always on the one topping up the drink or passing the joint/drug – the taker has an ethical obligation to consider their uninhibited self when indulging in these recreations. I believe it is unethical to shift my own agency onto someone else, in… Read more »
The point is, it may turn out to be an ethical breach, or it might turn out not to be one, which we can and should discuss. But the very fact that it is up to discussion shows that if it is a breach, it can not be an extremely grave one. Therefore it is necessary that we can talk about it without potentially lumping it with the worst crimes human beings are capable of. Like I said before, nobody will be willing to discuss “did I do wrong or not” in an honest and constructive manner if “yes” puts… Read more »
How nice of you to note that ‘boys are taught view their sexuality as inherently dangerous and exploitative’ after giving examples where a man clearly manipulates a woman, and carefully avoiding gender-assigning the other case. Then defending a girl from a common manipulation a boy might use. Any defense of boys. At all? Anywhere?
Actually, you’ll also note that Lucy is getting Tom drunk, topping up his drink etc. The scenario is deliberately designed to make it appear like the ‘answer’ is obvious, but after some discussion, students realise that actually there is a bunch of unethical stuff going on. Also these are just 2 of the many scenarios.
No she is not. First of all she is having a drink with him. Some would even say she is being a good host.
There is nothing enherantly predatory or dishonest in that act…. unless you find drinking and sex unethical.
It may not be considered unethical, but it is certainly something that students (and the rest of us) would do well to spend some time thinking about.
OK- so that right there is a great example of the type of conversation we want to have happen… where is the line between being a good host and behaving in a way which might be considered manipulative? Does a person have to have predatory intent for their actions to be manipulative? Or can they still be manipulative even if the intent is benevolent? I’m not suggesting easy answers here, the whole point is to get people to reflect on what their OWN views on this stuff is and where their own lines of acceptable behavior are. It’s not often… Read more »
Yah well call me suspicious. Without unanimity answering honestly could be very dangerous.
I however would kill to go to something like this. If for nothing else to keep the teacher honest.
Hey anongirl, While I find your tone a little sharp, I also find your cynicism and your suspicion of pedagogy extremely valuable. I’m a big fan of people – especially young people- being encouraged to critically deconstruct all forms of messaging directed at them- especially if that messaging happens to be didactic and authoritarian in nature. I also appreciate that a lot of sex-education (perhaps most?) is delivered from a top-down, moralising perspective. (I endured this sort of crap myself as a teen). Personally, I don’t relate well to a moralising approach of ‘do’s and ‘don’ts’ and I prefer an… Read more »
according to my gender-theory professor, all hetero-normative sex when the female is drinking, is rape, and the hetero-normative male should be charged!!!
That would be why I am pretty skeptical of anyone that calls themselves a gender-theory professor.
However at the risk of arguing a strawman can you elaborate? Why should the hetero-normative male be charged? What if the relationship is not hetero-normative, why should that change anything?
“according to my gender-theory professor, all hetero-normative sex when the female is drinking, is rape, and the hetero-normative male should be charged!!!”
Then I wonder what happens when two women get drunk and have sex with each other, or two men get drunk and have sex with each other. With two women, it would be two victims and no perps? With two men it would be two perps and no victims? How odd.
It also doesn’t make sense to say that flat out that in a case of rape the perpetrator has to be charged. It should still be up to the victim (to some degree) to decide whether to press charges or not. Check with the victim first, gender studies prof. I thought that was Dealing with Sexual Assault 101.
I’m not sure what all counts as “hetero-normative sex.” Is penis-in-anus considered “heteronormative sex”? That seems like a comparison where you could isolate the gender variable.
Drunk man has anal sex with drunk man — not rape?
Drunk man has anal sex with drunk woman — rape?
If that’s true, then what precisely is the reason for the difference, if the actions and effects are the same?
I am kinda interested in seeing those sceneros.
The problem is that you can come to this article with the assumption that is is always men who manipulate, and leave validated, not confronted.
If you really think the stereotype of the controlling male is not just outright correct, why not share with us one of the scenarios where a *girl* is clearly in the wrong?
All discussions of this I have ever been in seem to validate, and make no attempt to confront, the idea that guys are just crappier people on average than women are.
Maybe in the end it is men’s duty to paint that side of the picture. Guess it cannot be expected of women to do that. Ah well, we are not dependent on anybody else to do our activism for us. Maybe we should all write articles.
The problem is that this woman is representing an institution. Leading a class. When men representing institutions fail to handle the women’s perspective, they are not let off the hook.
Besides, every defense men have in this case seems to be previously countered a hundred times either from the conservative tradition, or from the feminism already shoved at these students.
Try to get heard, claiming stereotypes of men’s sexual activity are unfair, anywhere…
I think that is what Many Men have done since Adam being tricked by Eve…….. except now it is called Slut Shaming or Condoning Rape Culture- even IF/WHEN a Woman is an/the Offender……
“Adam being tricked by Eve” is a Bibical inaccuracy. For reference, read Genesis 2:8-25. You’ll see that God told Adam specifically not to eat from the tree. And that both Adam and the tree existed in the garden even before Eve was taken from Adam’s rib. Of course, Adam would have told Eve what God told him so she also knew that she was not to eat from the tree. Then read Gen 3:6 which is clear in saying that Adam was right next to Eve when she took the fruit. He knew exactly what tree she took the fruit… Read more »
Sorry Erin, but the New Testament disagrees: 1 Timothy 2:14 “… moreover, it was not Adam who was deceived but the woman. It was she who was led astray and fell into sin.” Of course, Adam threw Eve (and god, in a way) under the proverbial bus: Genesis 3:12 “The man replied, ‘The woman whom you put here with me – she gave it to me and so I ate it.'” And God apparently buys these lame plea bargain: Genesis 3:17 “To the man He said: “Because you listened to your wife and ate from the tree which I had… Read more »
Chong the NT agrees with Erin. Erin said the man was not tricked. The NT says the man was not deceived. Same thing. It then clarifies that Eve was tricked (by the serpent). The man was standing right beside his wife. He let her eat, knowing she had been tricked and knowing that God had said not to eat. Then he freely chose to eat as well – without the defence of being deceived. This is why he was punished (as was Eve) and the lame excuse was not accepted.
I’ll agree that there needs to be more to sex ed than labeling parts and what goes where. Of particular interest is this scenario: Consider the following scenario: Lucy and Tom meet each other at a bar. They begin drinking and flirting. As the bar closes, Lucy suggests they go back to her place. In the taxi they begin making out. They arrive at Lucy’s place and Lucy pours them both another drink. They begin making out again. Tom asks “do you want to do it?” and Lucy replies “Uh-huh, but do you have a condom?” Tom removes a condom… Read more »
Hi Danny Yes, well spotted. The scenario is deliberately designed to explore a number of different issues. The blindingly obvious one is the issue of the condom, but really there are a bunch of things going on for these two characters. First there is the issue of alcohol and capacity to consent. They have met at a bar and while it doesn’t say how much they have drunk it does mention ‘closing time’, a taxi and the fact that they keep drinking back at Lucy’s place. It’s fair to assume that either one or both are intoxicated, which presents a… Read more »
For example, they are at Lucy’s place and Lucy doesn’t have any condoms of her own. There could be many reasons for this. Students are asked to outline the reasons why they think a sexually active straight women might not carry her own condoms -usually there is an acknowledgement that there isn’t an established cultural norm around women buying their own condoms, which we then unpack and discuss. I did notice that as well but the removal of the condom caught my eye and I think that is what most people are going to immediately notice. Despite all the other… Read more »
“and illegal in some places as this would be considered rape or sexual assault”
Horray, yet another way to turn consensual sex into rape and jail an innocent guy for having drunk sex. I bet you consider yourself a feminist don’t cha dickface danny.
I guess you are OK that he takes full parental responsibility for the child they make? Or pays for all her meds and her failed carreer/life/future prospects of kids when he’s given her one of the many STD’s the condom was supposed to be stopping. Don’t be a numpty, the condom wasn’t just a hi-viz jacket, it was the helmet.
Students are asked to outline the reasons why they think a sexually active straight women might not carry her own condoms -usually there is an acknowledgement that there isn’t an established cultural norm around women buying their own condoms, which we then unpack and discuss. In other words, it is another way, in which the woman — and only the woman — is victimized in your scenario. Or in other words: At a first glance we see a scenario where the woman is the victim, but if we look closer we find that actually in different, subtle ways … the… Read more »
Well said.
Seriously? These are two scenarios and it is pretty easy to flip them around if you feel they are too one-sided. A woman could just as easily book the hotel room, pressuring the man into sex. (There are a lot of factors in relationships. I can speak firsthand; at this point in time my libido is much higher than my husband’s. It makes things especially touchy as men rejecting women sexually – especially their partner – is NOT the norm.) Or, you could look at what happens when a woman lies about being on birth control. It’s easy to pick… Read more »
…the other aspect is Tom is under the impression he must maintain the erection. Pressure to perform and please. This is an often ignored dynamic on the male end. Boys/men need to be taught that there are other ways to please a partner if one piece of ‘equipment’ is in ‘recovery mode’.
I agree Then8 but this count also for women/girls. A lot of them dont consider real sex unless there is a penetration, and they believe if the man goes soft its because he dislike them. I have experienced some women going all angry (with killer eyes, yelling etc) on the few times I went soft to early (thats why I dont drink any more).