You are correct that giving consent does not technically mean admitting you want it, but it does admit you're willing, and although that is an important distinction, I do not believe it contradicts the overall point of the message (which I don't think you're saying either).
I think YMY is related to slut-shaming the way that slut-walk is. It's the taking ownership of one's sexuality and interest in sex. I agree that it's a complex issue and I do not think YMY is the only answer. I think of it more as a side-effect, that insisting that women give active consent will, in turn, create a society that is more accepting of women's interest in sex.
I have the same problem you do with the seeming incompatible viewpoints of gender equality & women not giving consent. It resulted in quite a lengthy argument online with quite a few women jumping in to point out the inconsistencies.
Your own scenario of clothing != consent is very similar to my own reasons for finding his example appalling. I do not get dressed when I am at home unless I'm expecting company or leaving the house. Although I'm not nude, I am also not well-covered and do not believe it is appropriate for anyone, including partners, to take the state of my clothing as automatic consent.
I am not giving consent when I walk around a convention in a copper bikini, I am not giving consent when I answer the door in sleepwear, I am not giving consent if I happen to be nude at home, and I am not giving consent when I wear a "slave collar" and leash to a dungeon. None of that means inherent consent, and none of that should mean consent unless I have pre-negotiated with a partner "if I wear X outfit, I am deliberately telling you that I want sex", which was not the case in that particular story.
You make an interesting point when you say "they seem to be saying they do not view a woman as equally capable of voicing consent as a male" because this particular person's position was that women have exactly as much agency as men to say no, so women should just say no when they don't want it. If a woman has enough power to say no, then she should have just as much power to say yes, shouldn't she? If the perceived penalties for saying no are fictional and all in our perpetual-victim minds, then surely the penalties for saying yes are too? I don't think this point was brought up from this perspective in the online argument I am referencing.
no subject
I think YMY is related to slut-shaming the way that slut-walk is. It's the taking ownership of one's sexuality and interest in sex. I agree that it's a complex issue and I do not think YMY is the only answer. I think of it more as a side-effect, that insisting that women give active consent will, in turn, create a society that is more accepting of women's interest in sex.
I have the same problem you do with the seeming incompatible viewpoints of gender equality & women not giving consent. It resulted in quite a lengthy argument online with quite a few women jumping in to point out the inconsistencies.
Your own scenario of clothing != consent is very similar to my own reasons for finding his example appalling. I do not get dressed when I am at home unless I'm expecting company or leaving the house. Although I'm not nude, I am also not well-covered and do not believe it is appropriate for anyone, including partners, to take the state of my clothing as automatic consent.
I am not giving consent when I walk around a convention in a copper bikini, I am not giving consent when I answer the door in sleepwear, I am not giving consent if I happen to be nude at home, and I am not giving consent when I wear a "slave collar" and leash to a dungeon. None of that means inherent consent, and none of that should mean consent unless I have pre-negotiated with a partner "if I wear X outfit, I am deliberately telling you that I want sex", which was not the case in that particular story.
You make an interesting point when you say "they seem to be saying they do not view a woman as equally capable of voicing consent as a male" because this particular person's position was that women have exactly as much agency as men to say no, so women should just say no when they don't want it. If a woman has enough power to say no, then she should have just as much power to say yes, shouldn't she? If the perceived penalties for saying no are fictional and all in our perpetual-victim minds, then surely the penalties for saying yes are too? I don't think this point was brought up from this perspective in the online argument I am referencing.