Radical Feminist Analysis
According to radical feminist scholar Catharine MacKinnon (1989), consent is simply lacking around the existence of rape. In numerous instances, women’s sexual consent has been understood intently and expansively; and the simplicity of the absence revolving around resistance or refusal. Thus, feminists have critiqued this approach which regards unconscious women as consenting (MacKinnon, 1989: p. 340; Archard, 1998: p. 85). It is often assumed that the appearance of a woman, location, status, attire, sexual history and the relationship of the individual in question is to be considered consent; that is ‘asking for it’ and not acknowledging or approving that consent is necessary or irrelevant. Feminists have challenged the agenda and to discredit
…show more content…
27). The attitudinal accounts observe consent as the mental state of willingness or confirmation, whereas a performative account see consent as a physical response or utterance, such as ‘yes’ or nodding. The perception of a person wearing clothes that are revealing or being alone with a man have been subjected to the claims that the perpetrators believe that this is evidence that a woman is willingly consenting to engage in sexual intercourse. However, feminists have rejected the attitudinal accounts in support of the performative, in which the defendant can be challenged to produce the right evidence of what the woman had said or behaved in a way that suggest her consent to engage in sexual intercourse. The advantage of a performative account is that the sexual consent is not a woman’s default state to imply her consent, but in fact her words and actions must be granted affirmatively and actively (Whisnant, …show more content…
For instance, if a woman says ‘yes’ or remotely shows any sexual enthusiasm in order to sustain a threat or an attack from the perpetrator who may cause harm or potentially killing her, it would be irrational to suggest that her behaviour as consent (Schulhofer, 1998; Burgess-Jackson, 1996: p. 91 - 106). The concern in question is what pressures and other constraints that may undermine the validity of what is consent considered to an individual; although ‘no’ always means no, sometimes ‘yes’ can always mean no as well. There are numerous ranges of explicit and implicit threats that may constitute to a persons’ consent to engage in any sexual activities that are not meaningful. For instance, to make the victims’ life insufferable if she refuses to participate in any sexual engagement. In due course, any morally or legally perception of any non-violent forceful pressures must be considered as rape and it is a matter of controversy (Schulhofer, 1998; Burgess-Jackson, 1996: p. 91 - 106). From a feminists’ perspective, this is important since the existence of rape is formed from a patriarchal society, where men hold the authority of the social, legal and institutional power over a woman and can withhold the benefits from a woman
27). The attitudinal accounts observe consent as the mental state of willingness or confirmation, whereas a performative account see consent as a physical response or utterance, such as ‘yes’ or nodding. The perception of a person wearing clothes that are revealing or being alone with a man have been subjected to the claims that the perpetrators believe that this is evidence that a woman is willingly consenting to engage in sexual intercourse. However, feminists have rejected the attitudinal accounts in support of the performative, in which the defendant can be challenged to produce the right evidence of what the woman had said or behaved in a way that suggest her consent to engage in sexual intercourse. The advantage of a performative account is that the sexual consent is not a woman’s default state to imply her consent, but in fact her words and actions must be granted affirmatively and actively (Whisnant, …show more content…
For instance, if a woman says ‘yes’ or remotely shows any sexual enthusiasm in order to sustain a threat or an attack from the perpetrator who may cause harm or potentially killing her, it would be irrational to suggest that her behaviour as consent (Schulhofer, 1998; Burgess-Jackson, 1996: p. 91 - 106). The concern in question is what pressures and other constraints that may undermine the validity of what is consent considered to an individual; although ‘no’ always means no, sometimes ‘yes’ can always mean no as well. There are numerous ranges of explicit and implicit threats that may constitute to a persons’ consent to engage in any sexual activities that are not meaningful. For instance, to make the victims’ life insufferable if she refuses to participate in any sexual engagement. In due course, any morally or legally perception of any non-violent forceful pressures must be considered as rape and it is a matter of controversy (Schulhofer, 1998; Burgess-Jackson, 1996: p. 91 - 106). From a feminists’ perspective, this is important since the existence of rape is formed from a patriarchal society, where men hold the authority of the social, legal and institutional power over a woman and can withhold the benefits from a woman