Quote:
Originally Posted by PaperBagger'14
Ok let’s not get carried away in these make believe scenarios.
|
lol. Well...not me personally....but a guy I know. Him and her....well no...but you can imagine what it'd be like if they did!
Here's another scenario. I've been trying to avoid getting into too many details...but....
You're having sex in a missionary position. You get up onto your knees, you touch her hips motioning to her that you want her to be in front of you. She gets up onto her hands and knees and looks back and smiles. You start thrusting, but she is also thrusting back. There are quite loud smacking noises from your hips striking her buttocks. You give her a light tap on the buttocks - that creates considerably less force than the hips/buttocks force - she looks back and smiles and then begins to thrust back harder.
The correct thing to do is then stop and have a conversation about verbal consent and whether or not a slightly harder tap on the buttocks is acceptable?
The fact that people are obsessing over this, when we are literally dealing with a case where a bunch of creeps filmed a woman giving, potentially coerced, verbal consent and stating that verbal consent is required between position/moves is absurd. First....I don't believe any of you. Second you're missing the point of what consent is. It's not a legal contract that gives you carte blanche. This isn't a property sale, where once you sign on the dotted line you are committed.
This whole thing, once again, very CP.