Awooest Mawr @mawr@awoo.space

@starkatt @literorrery Let's try this a different way:

If we cannot guarantee that we sufficiently understand all contexts, we cannot trust ourselves to make that judgement.

Unless we're always assuming any answer to secretly mean "no," at some point, we have to trust in our ability to trust and believe a "yes" answer.

Trusting a "yes" answer at any point /could/ result in being responsible for assault regardless of context. Under this model, every accepted yes is a calculated risk.

@starkatt @literorrery Right, but if the responsibility is entirely placed on the person asking and not the person answering (which seems to be the model presented), that means accepting a yes that later changes to a no makes you responsible for assault, regardless of the context.

@starkatt @literorrery At some point, we have to trust the people we care about to tell us the truth when we ask them for consent. If we can't trust them to answer honestly, the only option is to assume the answer is "no" every single time.

If we assume that some people will at some point retroactively change a yes to a no, the only safe response is to hear all answers as "no."

I've fallen into the latter camp, 'cause I don't know what else to do and I'm just scared. All the time.

@starkatt All I can say is there should probably be a balance, 'cause right now I'm on the "terrified of touching anyone for any reason even when they've told me it's okay" side of understanding consent and in my more depressed moments, I wonder if I'll ever honestly feel anything positive from touching another person ever again.

@KawaSeadrake @starkatt And not only was it... pot, but (at least in the Midwest where I grew up), it barely had any active ingredients, unlike the turbocharged crazy high potency lab grown stuff you can find at your neighborhood pot shop today.