It's hard to explain the importance of something like this without sounding extremely suspect. But that's all right, even when I shouldn't be I'm used to being something of an outlier in my outlook. So.
There are concepts that intermittently wander in and out of the collective psyche of the general populace. As abstract concepts, they're not inherently bad. As active methodology? They're terrible.
Keep that firmly in mind when I say "enthusiastic consent" is arguably the biggest red flag possible in terms of any sort of potential intimacy.
Consent is rather like a Lovecraftian eldritch horror.
-The more active attention you give it, the more dangerous it gets.
-In any given place, the more you think it needs mentioning, the less likely you belong there.
Comfort is founded on approval. "Yes" is not something to be granted- it's the default. "No" as a concept is something more dangerous, which means it's obliged to have requirements. Those requirements vary widely in scope, scale, and urgency based on circumstance, but the possibility of going from "Yes" to "No" requires the approval of all involved.
Currently, there is a widely held erroneous belief that it's the other way around.
Building an environment where everyone understands the ebb and flow of the people and things in it? Where understanding and trust are the order of the day, but also that accepts duty, obligation, the possibility of conflict, and of allowing resolution within it? Not terribly difficult- if the components have also been built correctly. So of course, the real problem is flawed foundations.
Build your microcosm, your networks, and your happiness. Your education, expertise, ethics, and empathy.
But don't neglect to build your armor, sword, and shield.
No comments:
Post a Comment