Utterly unenthusiastic but totally consensual sex

The absence of enthusiasm ≠ nonconsensual

My book, Unsolicited Advice: A Consent Educator's (Canceled) Memoir, is available only on Substack and starts here. If you’d like to follow along but need a lower price, use these: 25% off, 50% off

What would you like to ask a consent educator? Submit your questions here and I’ll answer them on this Substack.

This post is freeeeeeee! The best way you can support this Substack is by resharing the free posts far and wide. Have a newsletter yourself? Is this article relevant to your audience? Might you have a few friends who you think would like it? xoxo

[Who is this article for? (Or, for my grammar nerds, “For whom is this article?” This article is intended for people who find that required enthusiasm in sex is not working for them, that perhaps it leads to people pleasing or fake enthusiasm, those who have responsive desire, who are getting back into sex after a period without it or after trauma, those who have chronic pain or live with disabilities that make sex challenging, but who want sex in their lives. This article is not for those who have just encountered the concept of required enthusiasm for the first time and perhaps are reckoning with many instances of having sex they didn’t want to have. This article will challenge binaries and demonstrate how a lack of enthusiasm ≠ rape, assault, violation, lack of agency, nor lack of consent.]

---

“Enthusiastic” consent has been the main tenet of consent education for years now. It comes from Planned Parenthood’s acronym, FRIES:

• Freely given

• Reversible

• Informed

• Enthusiastic

• Specific

But for a several years, a growing number of consent educators have critiqued this so-called requirement. We’ve seen that requiring enthusiasm leads to a lot of fake enthusiasm, enthusiasm looks different for everyone, and that you can, in fact, have perfectly consensual sex that isn’t a “hell yes.”

Some of the reasons someone may engage in sex that isn’t a “hell yes” include:

• trying to get pregnant

• sex to connect, even when it may be physically strenuous for those with chronic pain or disability

• sex work

• trying to bring sex back into your life after sexual trauma

Live Classes • Recorded Classes • Workbooks • Consulting • Merch! • Share the Load Podcast • You’re Doing It Wrong Podcast • Intimacy Coordination for TV, Film, + Theater

Would you be willing to restack and share this post with your followers and friends?

Simply put, the requirement of enthusiasm excludes a lot of people, including survivors or sexual assault, and isn’t trauma- nor disability-informed. I wrote about this at length here.

As you might imagine, this point of view ruffles some feathers. Some people will insist that no one should be having sex that isn’t a “hell yes.” I find myself wondering if those people have ever had sex after a long day’s work, while tired, or in a longterm relationship, for that matter.

Here’s why I harp on this point about enthusiasm: this kind of bump-sticker education (“no means no,” “anything other than an enthusiastic yes is a no”) reinforces false binaries and eschews critical thinking. There are false binaries of wanting-not wanting, consensual-nonconsensual that can be very appealing to a lot of people who want clear rules that will help them never do anything wrong or never experience anything bad. Those binaries then get wrongly equated to consensual=good, nonconsensual=bad=assault/rape. So what happens is that when you say, “Anything other than an enthusiastic yes is a no,” it becomes, “If the yes wasn’t enthusiastic, then the sex wasn’t consensual,” which, when snapped to a binary, becomes, “If consent wasn’t enthusiastically given, then the sex was assault or rape.” But plenty of consensual sex is less of a “hell yes” and more of a “sure, why not?”

Ex.

A: I’m so tired.

B: Do you wanna have sex?

A: I dunno. Start touching me, let’s see what happens.

Person A may just be tired, but they also may have what’s called responsive desire, where they often need to be aroused first, before they desire sex.

Ex.

Me: Can I go down on you?

My partner: Sure, if you want to.

Me: I do.

So...I do.

Ex.

I’m interested in the intellectual stimulation I get from sex but I’m not physically horny. I choose to have sex.

This also brings up Betty Martin’s concept of wanting vs willing. Within this framework, wanting is when something is my own, innate desire (e.g. “I want to have sex”). Willing is when I’m open to something because it’s someone else’s desire (e.g. “You want to have sex. I know I like sex with you. It wasn’t on my mind and I’m not horny, but, sure”). Related to this, I think there’s multiple kinds of not-wanting:

1. “I don’t want to” = I don’t actively have that desire

2. “I don’t want to” = I actively do not want that

Those are very different! Sometimes I want to have sex and my partner says, “Sure.” This isn’t particularly enthusiastic, but because I trust him not to have #2 sex, I’m happy to accept #1 sex. Our roles have also been reversed. Part of building trust with him comes from building trust with myself not to have #2 sex.

Call me cookoo for cocopuffs but I think having sex with a partner because they want to, even when you’re not “a hell yes,” is an incredibly intimate and special thing. I think this is a gift only given when immense trust is present, and everyone feels safe saying no. This is a choice only you can make.

The absence of enthusiasm ≠* nonconsensual. Nonconsensual ≠* assault/rape.

* does not necessarily equal

I think it’s worth mentioning that lately when I’ve brought this up on social media, I’ve been accused of being a trad wife. Some people equate my stance with straight cis women who think it’s their responsibility and obligation to have sex with their cis male partners.

Um, this is really silly. First of all, I think all of trad wifery falls apart in queer relationships. I’m queer and my gender doesn’t fall within the man-woman binary. Second of all, if someone enjoys feeling useful, helpful, obligated to someone, and generous, and sex is one of the ways that helps them feel those feelings, they can have sex for whatever reason they want. They can’t make anyone else act that way, but they have every right to have whatever kind of sex they want to have with another consenting adult. Third of all, it’s just really silly.

I recently listened to a podcast interview with a professor who talks about why people struggle to say no. She studies this and has found a lot of really fascinating conclusions as well as ways to help people say no. She describes a quote she has prominently displayed in her office, something to the effect of, “If it’s not a hell yes, it’s a no.” She swears that she lives by this. Then, she goes into depth about her own process of deciding whether or not to do something when asked. She has a nearly mathematical formula for decision-making. How much effort does it take? What is the cost (energy expended by her) - benefit (for the other person)? She gauges her capacity at the time and various resources—time, energy, money, etc. This process is utterly devoid of “hell yes.” The contradiction is never acknowledged.

I don’t like this “anything other than a ‘hell yes’ is a no” approach. It doesn’t work for me personally. If some only wants to have “hell yes” sex, that’s their prerogative. But I really enjoy my “sure, why not” sex and I believe in my right to have it.

•••

What would you like to ask a consent educator? Submit your questions here and I’ll answer them on this Substack.

UPCOMING CLASSES

• Who Has Time for Imposter Syndrome? w/ Josie 11/7

• Authenticity in Social Media w/Mia and Afomia 11/8 + 11/11

Live Classes • Recorded Classes • Workbooks • Consulting • Merch! • Share the Load Podcast • You’re Doing It Wrong Podcast • Intimacy Coordination for TV, Film, + Theater

Hi, I’m Mia. I found consent through Intimacy Coordination and fell in love with it so much that I decided to dedicate my life to making it as widely available as possible.

You can book me to speak at your company, organization, or university by contacting sean@collectivespeakers.com.

I offer classes on consent and creativity, people pleasing, the romantic comedy, as well as trainings for people who want to learn to teach consent. You can read more and sign up at consentwizardry.com.

Follow me on IG @consent.wizardry.