Non Repudiation Sexual Consent - raisercostin/raisercostin.github.io GitHub Wiki
Sexual consent looks a lot more complicated in practice.
In theory
In theory Alex should always have the consent of Bo. Otherwise Alex is blamable.
In practice
In practice Alex and Bo know exactly what is their own current thoughts regarding the sex consent. They also have a good guess of the each other position related to consent else there are several exceptional situations: where either Alex doesn't get it or Bo didn't clarify enough.
But outside of their minds things are less then clear. We are not omnipotent gods and we don't know if one is lying.
In practice, where any of them could lie, there are several cases:
- Bo consented and doesn't denies it.
- Bo consented but later denies it. How can Alex prove the consent? How can Bo prove it didn't gave it?
- Bo doesn't consent and is able to leave.
- Bo doesn't consent is not able to leave and doesn't complain later.
- Bo doesn't consent is not able to leave and complains later. How can Alex prove the consent? How can Bo prove it didn't gave it?
There are two other variations related to a later complain:
-
Bo consented but much much later denies it. How can Alex prove the consent? How can Bo prove it didn't gave it?
-
Bo doesn't consent is not able to leave and complains much much later. How can Alex prove the consent? How can Bo prove it didn't gave it?
-
There are other situations where Bo denies consent if she doesn't get what she wanted: married, money, position. How can Alex prove the consent? How can Bo prove it didn't gave it?
Since all these influence the practical evaluation of consent what is the solution? How can Alex get a non-repudiation consent?
Other concepts
- rape-by-deception - http://lawweb.usc.edu/centers/clhc/events/feature/documents/Rubenfeld.pdf