I support the idea in theory, but there are problems with ambiguity and enforcement of said laws in practice. They are by no means a catch-all solution to the issue of rape, but they are justified in that verbal consent is obviously necessary for sex, and the law should reflect that.
I obviously agree that there should be an expression of consent to initiate some sort of sexual interaction but am uncomfortable about explicit verbal statements of consent being the only way. It ignores a lot of the way that we as humans communicate. Body language, nodding the head, and shouldn't you being the one initiating the act be implicit interest in the activity? And there are people with disabilities that have difficulty with speech, or the deaf. There are a lot of things that complicate that being the only standard.
There are obviously ways to work all of that out but the law should be more nuanced to accommodate for that.
And I think it's important to impress on people the equal importance, not just of saying yes, but also saying no.
There is a lot of gray area in these types of laws, and my statement probably should have been more carefully phrased to address that. Even with poorly written affirmative consent laws that don't address ambiguous situations, it at least sets the precedent of the need for an expression of consent.
Poll
