File not found.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_018484.jpg
2.67 MB
Extraction Summary
0
People
1
Organizations
0
Locations
0
Events
1
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Document from a congressional investigation (exhibit)
File Size:
2.67 MB
Summary
This document, marked 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_018484', is a theoretical discussion on the concept of enthusiastic sexual consent. It defines the term, explores critiques from feminist, sex worker, and asexual perspectives, and concludes that while not perfect, enthusiastic consent is a valuable baseline for communication in relationships. The text does not contain any names, dates, or specific events related to Jeffrey Epstein, but its subject matter is highly relevant to such an investigation.
Organizations (1)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| House Oversight Committee |
Likely origin of the document, as indicated by the Bates number 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_018484' in the footer.
|
Relationships (1)
A married friend (unnamed)
→
Marriage
→
Her husband (unnamed)
An anecdote is shared about a married friend and her husband discussing the practicalities of enthusiastic consent in their marriage.
Key Quotes (3)
"Enthusiastic consent means an enthusiastic partner: one who is responding passionately, kissing you back, saying things like "Yes" or "Oh my God, don't stop"..."Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_018484.jpg
Quote #1
"It's worth noting that there are critiques within feminism of the concept of enthusiastic consent. For example, some feminist sex workers point out that when they have sex for money, their consent is not exactly "enthusiastic," but they still feel that their consent is real consent..."Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_018484.jpg
Quote #2
"In practice, as long as everyone involved is having consensual fun, criticism is secondary. Practically speaking, consent is the most important thing..."Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_018484.jpg
Quote #3
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (3,572 characters)
consent. Not a partner who says, "Okay, I guess," in a bored tone, but doesn't actively say "no." Not a partner who is silent and non-reactive, but doesn't actively stop you when you start having sex with them. Not a partner who seems hesitant, or anxious, or confused. Enthusiastic consent means an enthusiastic partner: one who is responding passionately, kissing you back, saying things like "Yes" or "Oh my God, don't stop"... or a partner who talks to you ahead of time about what will happen, as many BDSMers and sex workers do, and knows how to safeword or otherwise get out of the situation if you do something they don't like.
It's worth noting that there are critiques within feminism of the concept of enthusiastic consent. For example, some feminist sex workers point out that when they have sex for money, their consent is not exactly "enthusiastic," but they still feel that their consent is real consent, and that their choices must be respected. The same goes for some asexual people. Asexuality is commonly defined as "not feeling sexual attraction to others," but some asexual people have romantic relationships with other people in which they have sex entirely to satisfy their partner, and some of them have said that they don't feel included by feminist discussions of enthusiastic consent.
Hey, even some of my non-asexual, non-sex worker friends have problems with the idea that they aren't "really" consenting unless they're super-enthusiastic about the sexual act at hand. A married friend once commented wryly that if she and her husband always demanded 100% enthusiastic consent from each other, then the marriage would fall apart. But as we continued to discuss it, she and her husband both agreed that they have zero problem with the situation as it stands.
I don't want to sweep those critiques under the rug. I figure that as long as everyone's communicating about the situation openly, and working to keep things relatively low-pressure, then consent is likely to happen, even if it's not perfectly "enthusiastic." I've had extensive debates on the topic with other feminists, though, and I often seek more, because honing consent theory is one of my favorite things!
All this having been said: the concept of enthusiastic consent has been very helpful for me personally. I know that it's also been helpful for an enormous number of other people who are trying to understand boundaries in their sexual relationships. I absolutely believe that enthusiastic consent is an important and useful standard, and I do my best to observe that standard as much as I can in my own relationships. So, while I think some critiques are reasonable, I also think that the idea of enthusiastic consent is the best baseline assumption to start these conversations... if not to end them.
7) In practice, as long as everyone involved is having consensual fun, criticism is secondary. Practically speaking, consent is the most important thing; from a pragmatic standpoint, the question of whether sexuality arises from biology or culture doesn't matter nearly as much. (I find the question of whether BDSM can be categorized as a sexual orientation to be more politically and theoretically interesting than practically important.)
Understanding sexual biology or culture may help us grasp some of the complexities of consent. For example, people often have trouble saying "no" to things directly: when was the last time you explicitly said "no" when you didn't want to do something? Which of the following exchanges is more likely:
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_018484
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document