thats good news, but we need to see if it actually gets implemented
[deleted] on
[deleted]
pecche on
what if.. both are happy, but the day aftershe says whatever reason with no evidence that was a violence?
THiedldleoR on
>Consent is defined as a „free, conscious and unequivocal manifestation of the person’s willingness to participate in the sexual act“ valid for the entire duration of the act and revocable at any time.
>The definition aligns with the Istanbul Convention and jurisprudence from Italy’s Supreme Court, which has recognised sexual violence even in the absence of physical resistance.
So… what does that mean? Is that just a free ticket for women to have their revenge against guys they dislike?
I have no idea what a guy is supposed to do to prove there was consent.
namitynamenamey on
Ah, for a moment I though they had banned BDSM on grounds of „violence is violence“. Glad it’s not that.
Lintashi on
While I celebrate every law that lessens violence and protects vulnerable people, this one seems to be not well thought out. Explicit consent means you cannot be under any influence. So any sex after any amount of alcohol is out, even if both consented. That means, before engaging in any sexual act, one would need to test the other party for any mind- altering substance, and get full medical diagnosis to make sure there are no hidden neurodivergencies that could influence consent. Otherwise, there is a risk to be accused.
mezzommac on
New increase in dubcon noncon dark romances?
Significant-Load1116 on
So someone can change their mind after the deed has been done. That’s scary! I don’t know why anyone would cheer that on…
Some_Cows_Moo on
Isn’t the red hand print a symbol the indigenous people being taken and murdered? Seems like a weird pic to use.
Leave A Reply
Du musst angemeldet sein, um einen Kommentar abzugeben.
9 Kommentare
thats good news, but we need to see if it actually gets implemented
[deleted]
what if.. both are happy, but the day aftershe says whatever reason with no evidence that was a violence?
>Consent is defined as a „free, conscious and unequivocal manifestation of the person’s willingness to participate in the sexual act“ valid for the entire duration of the act and revocable at any time.
>The definition aligns with the Istanbul Convention and jurisprudence from Italy’s Supreme Court, which has recognised sexual violence even in the absence of physical resistance.
So… what does that mean? Is that just a free ticket for women to have their revenge against guys they dislike?
I have no idea what a guy is supposed to do to prove there was consent.
Ah, for a moment I though they had banned BDSM on grounds of „violence is violence“. Glad it’s not that.
While I celebrate every law that lessens violence and protects vulnerable people, this one seems to be not well thought out. Explicit consent means you cannot be under any influence. So any sex after any amount of alcohol is out, even if both consented. That means, before engaging in any sexual act, one would need to test the other party for any mind- altering substance, and get full medical diagnosis to make sure there are no hidden neurodivergencies that could influence consent. Otherwise, there is a risk to be accused.
New increase in dubcon noncon dark romances?
So someone can change their mind after the deed has been done. That’s scary! I don’t know why anyone would cheer that on…
Isn’t the red hand print a symbol the indigenous people being taken and murdered? Seems like a weird pic to use.