‘Affirmative consent’, Jesus College Cambridge

On December 3, Stephanie Hayward and Dr Charlotte Proudman spoke on the advantages of an affirmative consent model in criminal and family law.

The force of affirmative consent lies in its ability to stymie a defendant’s reliance on myths and stereotypes to justify a belief in consent (the mens rea of rape). Affirmative consent requires communication by words or conduct which conveys consent. If a woman does not say ‘no’ — she does not say ‘yes’. Too often, passivity is equated with consent, and the underlying concept of consent - implying the ‘doer’ and ‘done-to’, ‘initiator’ and ‘receiver’ - drives this myth. Under an affirmative consent model, defendants are prevented from hiding behind spurious stereotypes about consent & female sexuality when they do not hold a belief in consent. Belief must be grounded in words or conduct communicating consent. Without such communication, belief in consent is harder to establish.

For further research, and links to Charlotte and Stephanie’s presentations, see here