History UsefulNotes / Consent

Most places have a set of fixed rules established by law (with some exceptions) called "age of consent." In the United Kingdom, Canada, 31 U.S. states and the District of Columbia, the age of consent is 16. In 8 U.S. states, the age of consent is 17, and the other 11 states set it at 18. Outside of North America it gets murkier; Japan's default age of consent is 16 but can vary towards more sensible numbers depending on the prefecture, parts of Mexico have it as low as ''12'', and some countries in Africa and Asia skirt the issue entirely by vetoing sex [[LetsWaitAWhile unless the couple is legally married]] (which itself has a varying age restriction depending on the country).

However, consent [[{{Understatement}} is not a simple matter]]; if it were, this Useful Notes page wouldn't exist and there wouldn't be lengthy legal trials where two parties disagree on whether consent was given.

First, does the person reasonably understand what is happening? Second, does the person have the right to stop what is happening without external consequences? Third, does the person have the right to require reasonable protections? If the answer to any of these questions is “no”, the situation has taken a horrifically wrong turn. Let's go over each of these:

While both constructs are useful, they are far from waterproof. What if someone is of age but not informed? Scams are not cool! Or what if someone who's not of age is "informed" and consents to something that is [[NotSafeForWork Not Safe For Underage People]] and [[MyGodWhatHaveIDone later regrets it]]? One of the main points of having age limits is that kids should not be forced to take that kind of responsibility! It's ''not'' their own fault if they get into [[HarmfulToMinors a situation that hurts them]], no matter [[ItSeemedLikeAGoodIdeaAtTheTime how good an idea it seemed at the time]]. And also, what if someone is technically of age and technically informed, but has a mental handicap that makes them unfit to make the decision?

Most places have a set of fixed rules established by law (with some exceptions) called "age of consent." In the United Kingdom, Canada, 31 U.S. states and the District of Columbia, the age of consent is 16. In 8 U.S. states, the age of consent is 17, and the other 11 states set it at 18. Outside of North America it gets murkier; Japan's default age of consent is 13 but can vary towards more sensible numbers depending on the prefecture, parts of Mexico have it as low as ''12'', and some countries in Africa and Asia skirt the issue entirely by vetoing sex [[LetsWaitAWhile unless the couple is legally married]] (which itself has a varying age restriction depending on the country).

A case worth mentioning is what happens if someone moves from one nation to another where age of consent is different. In the case of a 16-year-old moving from Japan (13) to California (18), they would simply have to go by the California's consent laws. But what about the reverse, moving to Japan to do something (or someone) that would be below age of consent in California? It turns out most nations have additional laws to discourage this, most of them stating the eloping couple would still have to follow their nation of origin's consent laws. Say an illegal couple featuring an adult and a 15-year-old born in California moves to Japan to consummate their relationship; they're basically ''announcing'' that they're breaking Californian law and will be deported back home to be tried under Californian law, being prosecuted for their original crime as well as every sort of "evading justice" charge under the sun.

Then there are exceptions to the rules because it isn't thought to be a good idea to put some kid in jail because they're having consensual sex with their boyfriend or girlfriend who just happens to be below the normal age of consent when the two of them are close in age — for example, a 15-year-old and 16-year-old, in some places. So exceptions are sometimes made; for example, in Maryland, the age of consent is 16, but it's legal to have sex with someone 15 if you're under 21. In Colorado, the age of consent is 17, but it's legal to have consensual sex with someone 15 or 16 as long as you're no more than 10 years older. In California, all sex with anyone under 18 is a crime unless the two are married (yes, that means if a 17-year-old boy is having consensual sex with his 17-year-old girlfriend, ''both'' are committing a crime)[[labelnote:*]]This situation (and others related to it, i.e., if the act was filmed regardless of mutual agreement, both would be considered to be creating child pornography) and dueling are perhaps the only crimes where both parties can equally be considered both victim and perpetrator.[[/labelnote]], but the crime is reduced from a felony (with prison time of at least 3 years) to a misdemeanor (maximum jail time of six months and a fine) if they are no more than four years difference in age. [[note]] Although, even in places where there are no exceptions made for similar aged couples, it's highly unlikely the kids will be sent to jail, providing there wasn't any coercion. Remember that Juvenile courts ''must'' give the minor the benefit of the doubt before deciding how to deal with them, and a minor will only go to jail if they are a ''danger'' to others. [[/note]]

Then there are exceptions to the rules because it isn't thought to be a good idea to put some kid in jail because they're having consensual sex with their boyfriend or girlfriend who just happens to be below the normal age of consent when the two of them are close in age — for example, a 15-year-old and 16-year-old, in some places. So exceptions are sometimes made; for example, in Maryland, the age of consent is 16, but it's legal to have sex with someone 15 if you're under 21. In Colorado, the age of consent is 17, but it's legal to have consensual sex with someone 15 or 16 as long as you're no more than 10 years older. In California, all sex with anyone under 18 is a crime (yes, that means if a 17-year-old boy is having consensual sex with his 17-year-old girlfriend, ''both'' are committing a crime)[[labelnote:*]]This situation (and others related to it, i.e., if the act was filmed regardless of mutual agreement, both would be considered to be creating child pornography) and dueling are perhaps the only crimes where both parties can equally be considered both victim and perpetrator.[[/labelnote]], but the crime is reduced from a felony (with prison time of at least 3 years) to a misdemeanor (maximum jail time of six months and a fine) if they are no more than four years difference in age. [[note]] Although, even in places where there are no exceptions made for similar aged couples, it's highly unlikely the kids will be sent to jail, providing there wasn't any coercion. Remember that Juvenile courts ''must'' give the minor the benefit of the doubt before deciding how to deal with them, and a minor will only go to jail if they are a ''danger'' to others. [[/note]]

A case worth mentioning is what happens if someone moves from one nation to another where age of consent is different. In the case of a 16-year-old moving from Japan (13) to California (18), they would simply have to go by the California's consent laws. But what about the reverse, moving to Japan to do something (or someone) that would be below age of consent in California? It turns out most nations have additional laws to discourage this, most of them stating the eloping couple would still have to follow their nation of origin's consent laws. Say an illegal couple featuring an adult and a 15-year-old born in California moves to Japan to consummate their relationship; they're basically ''announcing'' that they're breaking Californian law and will be deported back home to be tried under Californian law, being persecuted for their original crime as well as every sort of "evading justice" charge under the sun.

-->--''Website/{{Cracked}}'', [[http://www.cracked.com/blog/how-men-are-trained-to-think-sexual-assault-no-big-deal/ "How Men Are Trained to Think Sexual Assault Is No Big Deal"]]

The discussion about consent is particularly intense when it comes to the sexuality known as [[CasualKink BDSM]], since this sexuality touches both the first and the second type, and sometimes also the third. (BDSM stands for '''B'''ondage, '''D'''ominance-games and '''S'''ado-'''M'''asochism. It started out as a combination of the old terms Bondage&Discipline, Dominance&Submission, and Sadism&Masochism.) However, the discussion is not in any way limited to that particular field: it also includes mainstream sexuality as well as all kinds of issues that have nothing to do with sexuality.

However, consent [[{{Understatement}} is not a simple matter]]; if it were, this Useful Notes page wouldn't exist.

Reasonable understanding means you know what's going on and what to expect. If a guy and a girl are on a couch heavy necking, and without further preamble he reaches under her dress, pulls off her panties and positions himself for penetration, that's certainly not what she was expecting given what was happening immediately prior. Even in the most charitable interpretation, it ''may'' have been expected, but not without a handful of intermediate steps involved.

Being able to stop without external consequences means that you're not being [[{{Blackmail}} blackmailed]] or forced to do whatever is happening by extortion or threat to others, nor threatened with injury for refusing. The other person can leave (or tell you to leave) or refuse to see you again, but they can't hurt or injure you, nor cause you problems with other people.

There can still be challenges with plain consent. Let's say a man asks a woman if she consents to "have sex". He and she may have different interpretations of what she has agreed to. He may think it includes acts X, Y and Z, but she only thought X was being OK'd. As such, some consent experts recommend asking "can I ___ your ___"(fill in the blanks). This way, the other person knows exactly what you're asking to do.

There can still be challenges with plain consent. Let's sat a man asks a woman if she consents to "sex". He and she may have different interpretations of what she has agreed to. As such, some consent experts recommend asking "can I "___" your "___""(fill in the blanks). This way, the other person knows exactly what you're proposing.

Consent can be more problematic when there is a power imbalance. What if a boss asks for consent to sex from an employee? She may say "yes" because she needs the job, not because she wants to have sex. What if a man drives a woman to his country cabin in the wilderness and then asks for her consent? (she doesn't have a car and it's 100 miles from her home). What if a man who is working as an immigration official asks a woman seeking refugee status out for dinner and then asks for her consent to sex. In each of these examples, the woman may feel she can't truly say no.

The right to reasonable protections means they can insist on means to warn of the need to stop, and for use of any reasonable birth control and/or disease protection with respect to how well they know you and your history. Two people who don't know each other or who are in a non-monogamous relationship should use condoms or dental dams. Two people who know each other and have knowledge the other has no diseases might use a non-barrier contraceptive, and so on. This also includes the use of "safe words" to allow things to stop if it goes too far, especially if they're going to ignore "no" or "stop" when people are playing games involving fake non-consent (like when one plays the homeowner and the other plays the "burglar" who broke in and decides to "take advantage" of them, or the other way around). Or people doing BDSM, there may be minor amounts of pain they don't mind or actually like, but they must be given a means to indicate something is wrong to allow things to stop.

The simplest form of consent is plain consent. Someone saying "uh, yeah, sure" or whatever when asked.