To honor Sexual Assault awareness month, I would like to bring in a discussion of consent that has been pivotal in clinical work at WILA.
There may be fear that discussing nuance in consent could inadvertently lead to invalidating or outright denying survivor accounts. Instead, perhaps there is a way we can acknowledge the complexity of sexuality and relationships, while also emphasizing the absolute necessity of safety and the right of all people to be protected from violation.
Whether through formal education or cultural conversation, many of us have unknowingly adopted a binary understanding of consent as looking either like an enthusiastic “yes!” or a decisive “no.” This offers the benefit of a high, clear standard for consent. But, this black-and-white approach is often better suited for legal or policy settings, rather than the human experience. In the real world, sexual encounters typically involve a lot more nuance, depending on the nature of the relationship between participants, the age, number and gender of participants, the setting and more.
We can broaden our understanding of consent to meet people where they are at, to conceive of how they have been impacted in their lives. Discussing consent in a broader way can bring about a much richer and deeper connection, and preserve a sense of safety and empowerment for sexual participants. This can help people to cope with the intensity of shame and confusion around what is sexual assault.
Affirmative and Enthusiastic Consent
Expectations around affirmative or explicit consent do not take into account the data suggesting that the vast majority of the time, consent is communicated nonverbally between partners through body language or indirect verbal communication. The idea that the only legitimate consent is explicitly verbalized does not capture how people are actually communicating.
Similarly, the belief that consent be enthusiastic — while ideal — may not reflect the experiences of those who have multiple or conflicting feelings about their sexual encounters. For instance, many people feel nervousness or ambivalence before sex. Some people experience physical discomfort with sex, others are in long-term relationships in which each instance of sex is not as novel as it is for new sexual partners. Asking for enthusiasm may collapse the complexity of sexuality for individuals.
Trauma and Neurodivergence
Trauma can powerfully impact an individual’s emotional regulation and how they perceive the presence of threat. Trauma can also inhibit individuals from feeling safe in their bodies. It may not be possible for a trauma survivor to be able to verbally articulate their sexual wants in the moment and they often rely on nonverbal cues to communicate their desires. Requirements around verbal, affirmative consent, therefore may not encapsulate consent processes for trauma survivors and negate their experience of wanting sex, but not being able to verbalize it.
Similarly, neurodivergent folks often struggle with verbal communication, particularly involving emotions, boundaries or physiological sensation. They might process social cues differently or need extra time to respond, making “in-the-moment” verbal exchanges stressful or confusing. Consent models that only value clear, spoken “yes” or “no” moments might unintentionally exclude neurodivergent folks, even when they are fully engaged and capable of meaningful consent.
Consent Under the Influence
Sex under the influence of drugs and alcohol is very common. Discussion of consent regarding substance use can be much more nuanced than binary safety warnings would suggest. Substance use is often tied to sexual trauma, as perpetrators can exploit lowered inhibition or deficits in judgement to victimize and assault. However, sometimes individuals knowingly consume substances to better facilitate social interactions, such as to decrease anxiety. Engaging in sex while under the influence does not necessarily pose a significant safety hazard.
Untangling these differences requires a dialogue of consent that includes realities about substance use. It is clear that someone is incapable of giving consent if they are unconscious or are disconnected from reality. Less clear is how people can understand their line between use, intoxication and incapacitation. How can individuals explore where their and potential partners’ boundaries are? What would it look like for dating partners to communicate ahead of time their expectations around sex and substance use?
Consent Within Ongoing or Long-Term Relationships
Consent processes often look different in ongoing intimate relationships compared to new or first-time sexual encounters. Long-term partners often have an established sequence of nonverbal gestures that indicate sexual interest to their partner. Moreover, there can be instances in established relationships in which individuals feel conflicted about having sex with their partner; perhaps they are not in the mood for sexual contact, but they do want to prioritize the wellbeing of their relationship. Individuals may benefit from exploring where their internal line is between willingness and pressure and how they might communicate that to a partner.
Consent comes in a million shades, and being able to hear, understand and communicate consent is necessary to honor all people, but especially assault survivors.
Discussions about consent have become so focused on legal explanations that they have marginalized some from being able to cultivate a relational dialogue about consent, and that is exactly what is necessary to facilitate the kind of safety in sex that can be so vital for all people.
This Sexual Awareness Month, take stock in how consent impacts you in your life with your specific identities and experiences. And consider how listening and facilitating conversations about consent can increase closeness, satisfaction and safety in your relationships.