Link to article : {http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/sex/11738202/Sex-consent-contracts-for-university-students-Would-you-sign.html}
{http://instantconsent.com/}
'Consent kits' complete with contracts, are being distributed to students at US universities with the intention of ensuring that both parties have agreed to sex. Olivia Goldhill reports
When 'sexual consent contracts' are being offered to young people as a serious option - and not a joke - you know something has gone terribly wrong.
Sexual consent has rightly become a heated topic, especially on university campuses, where students are often experimenting with their first sexual encounters.
A Telegraph survey found that one in three female undergraduates in the UK say they've been sexually assaulted while at university, and many prestigious institutions have been accused of failing to address sexual violence on campus.
In the United States, several Ivy League universities have been investigated and disciplined by the Obama administration for not addressing sexual assault complaints.
Meanwhile, a former Oxford graduate student attempted to sue the university after it refused to investigate her reported rape by a fellow student during her Master’s degree.
Oxford and Cambridge now hold mandatory sexual consent workshops for students during freshers week, to discuss 'myths and misunderstandings' around rape and harassment.
But the latest attempt to address concerns over sexual consent seems more problematic than useful.
An advocacy group, The Affirmative Consent Project, is distributing 'sexual consent kits' to universities across the United States.
What on earth is a sexual consent contract?
Alison Berke, founder of the project, says the group has sold or given away at least 1,000 of the kits to students. The packages cost $1.99 (£1.29) and include a condom, pen, some breath mints… and a sex contract.
Photo: instantconsent.com
The contract reads “YES! We agree to have SEX!” and has space for both parties to sign, stating that they 'agree to have consensual sex with one another'.
The couple are also encouraged to take a photo of themselves holding the contract.
“By having the condom in the pack, the idea is that as you reach for your protection you see the contract and it might make you stop and think, and take consent into consideration when you decide to be intimate with someone,” explains Berke.
“The consent kits are really meant to be conversation starters. They are a way to break the ice. We don't expect people to use the contract as a legal document.”
A smartphone app, We-Consent, has also been launched by a separate group, and allows couples to record their consent before having sex.
We-Consent users states their names on camera and, if they are both clearly heard saying “yes”, then the app responds with: “Consent confirmed. Have fun.”
Should we be signing before sex?
Although sexual consent contracts have been offered as a genuine attempt to develop students’ understanding, the idea of using a formal contract to record consent is problematic for several reasons.
Dave Llewellyn, who founded the Good Lad Workshop at Oxford University to encourage students to act like 'good guys', says that contracts are often suggested by those being facetious.
“When we talk about a scenario that’s quite difficult in terms of consent, you find that some guys feel frustrated and say, ‘I don’t what I'm supposed to do. Should I pull out a contract and make them sign it?’,” he says.
“I think having a piece of paper and a signed contract is a bit ridiculous and it sounds like an excuse for people to not engage in learning about consent.”
Llewellyn says that contracts are a simplistic response to the question of consent: listening to your partner, recognising how an enthusiastic sexual partner behaves, and making sure both people are comfortable throughout sex.
Consent should, he says, be explicit throughout a sexual experience – it shouldn’t be reduced to a signature on a piece of paper. Llewellyn encourages student to think about the kind of sex they want to have. “If you’re having good sex with someone who really likes you, then you’re already past these issues,” he says.
Consent contracts are also troubling because sexual consent is not frozen at one point in time.
“All that written contract really says is that we consented when we were both standing here, writing this. You may then start having intercourse and suddenly one of the people is not comfortable with what’s happening and then consent disappears,” says Llewellyn. “People are allowed to change their minds and should be empowered to change their minds at any stage.”
Breach of contract?
Alison Berke admits that the sexual consent contract carries no weight as a legal document, but the form could also cause legal difficulties.
Barrister Felicity Gerry QC, who specialises in tackling sexual offences, says that if someone signed a consent form but was later forced to have sex, the document could undermine a rape complaint.
“There’s a lack of uniformity on what rape means,” she says. “Drafting terms would be very problematic – would you say yes to vaginal but not anal, with or without fingers, in and out how many times? How would such an agreement be enforced?”
Rape is also a serious crime, not a civil matter. “It’s wrong to reduce rape to a breach of contract,” adds Gerry.
In recent times, both US and UK universities have come under fire for reportedly failing to properly address sexual assault on campus. In New York, Columbia University is currently being sued by a male student who was accused of rape (he was found 'not responsible' by the university) and whose alleged victim, Emma Sulkowicz said the university failed to carry out a thorough investigation and carried a mattress around campus as protest.
Sex contracts have been introduced to help the conversation surrounding consent, and to create a more pro-active approach to ensuring that your sexual partner is a willing participant.
But, though the intentions are well-meaning, it’s clear that this is an overly-simplistic and potentially harmful solution to the question of sexual consent.
Consent shouldn’t be reduced to a signature.
Sexual partners should be bound together by chemistry and mutual desire, not documentation, and should be able to change their minds whenever they like. Contractual agreements belong in the boardroom, not the bedroom.