Absolutely thrilled to see this. Yes, let’s talk race and sexual orientation, and cishet white middle-class consent cues and what “enthusiastic” looks like. Let’s talk the difference between ideal and practice, the intent of the theory versus its effect. Especially in California where “enthusiastic consent” is law now—and let’s talk who that will be enforced against.
Can we also talk dis/ability, mental illness, neurodivergence? Can we talk about the obstacle of learning a whole new script of non-verbal social cues to assure people we’re “enthusiastic” enough? Can we talk compulsive checking of consent, and anxiety and the impossibility of perfect constant enthusiastic consent? Can we talk about brains and communication styles, especially for neurodivergent folks?
Can we talk about the “extra” amount of communication often needed the further we go from cishet white abled neurotypical middle-class normative? And how that gets interpreted as unenthusiastic?
Can we talk about the (inadvertent?) pathologizing of experimentation, of “maybe,” of “let’s try”? About the binariness of “anything but YES!!! is a no”?
Can we also talk how readily coopted enthusiastic consent is by abusers, how it doesn’t provide a new magical solution, how it can be gaslighted or a mindgame of wondering just how “enthusiastic” you really were?
Please, let’s talk GOOD consent and how to get it. Not “enthusiastic” consent and how supposedly intuitive it is.
