Yes is better than No (11/1 post reposted)

Michael Kimmel and Gloria Steinem discuss the specifics of sexual assault in an article “Yes is better than No”, specifically on campus in America.  They argue that the invasion of bodies is seen as less of an issue than the invasion of private property.  It is often thought that this bias of patriarchal law is due to the past women’s rights have seen.  In America, women still don’t have the full right to make choices about their entire sexual and reproductive health, including their right to consent.  However, the Obama administration has been taking strides to combat sexual invasion and the ongoing rape culture America is experiencing.  The first step to doing this, is to change the saying of “No means no” to “Yes means yes.” California is the first state to embrace what has been known as this “yes means yes” movement.  The article’s major thesis is that “silence is not consent.”  With the “No means no” movement, there was a grey area of silence that was considered to be a yes, which is wrong, and exactly what these authors are arguing against. I agree with the authors’ argument that no means no just isn’t enough anymore.  Often times, in my own personal experience, I’ve seen people who experience this don’t always have the ability, time, or confidence to explicitly say no.  People forget that in the time when sexual assault is occurring, it can be overpowering and scary. Its not always so cut and dry that a simple “no” is even an option.  Frequently it’s the silence, the grey area, that causes the question, but people forget how easy it is to be silent and try and use body language or other outlets to say no.  These ways aren’t considered apart of the “no means no” movement though. It is possible that a feminist would oppose this argument.  They might state that by having to say “yes” every time you want to have sex with someone is overdoing it, or that there are many gestures that can also signal a yes. A reaction to this view could be that this law is trying to make it easier to stop sexual assault from happening, not stopping sex from happening.  If it is clearly consensual, there is no one standing there making you both say yes. However, often times rapists will use the line “well she didn’t say no.” This law can protect victims against this common line.   Someone else who opposes this view, someone against women’s equality and their right to make decisions about their own body, or simply an anti-feminist, could reply with many things.  Examples could be that people say “saying explicitly yes is weird” or “if I need a yes I wont get what I want.” There are so many other ways that people could oppose this, when it was implemented in Antioch College, the rule did not only feel negative repercussions from the students, but the media.  Saturday Night Live, among other media outlets made jokes that “Yes means Yes” wasn’t a smart and effective rule to put into place, but an example of a university being too “politically correct”.  This negative reaction was surprising and appalling to see, but many years have passed since then and positive steps are being taken by different levels of government.  In time, this opposition will get smaller and smaller.  The authors’ response to these negative views is simply that yes is one of the most erotic words in the English language.  The authors could also respond with countless examples of when the “no means no” movement failed, and the simple fact that sexual assault on campus is not a diminishing problem, but one that is sky rocketing, and a change is needed.