• intensely_human@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    Dude I’m poor and I’ll appreciate that $10M choice any day.

    With $10M on the table, my poverty is now a choice.

    • Maggoty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Sure, just like a promotion becomes a choice for a woman under a misogynist boss when he propositions her. Consent cannot exist in such a power imbalance. And it’s not your fault or her fault. It’s us, it’s the system making that shitty situation real. We can and should change the system so that nobody faces such a choice.

      • Unbecredible@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        It can’t exist? As an exaggeration, is there no way for a woman to meaningfully consent to an offer from her male boss to swap packed lunches? After all, he might take offense and pass her over for the promotion if she declines.

        And if consent is possible in that scenario, what makes it immediately impossible in the scenario where sex or romance is involved?

        It seems obvious that consent has to exist on some kind of spectrum like almost everything else. But it’s spoken about and thought about in a very binary way. That seems problematic given how big a topic consent is lately.

        • Maggoty@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          Funny you should bring up food. In the military leaders are trained to eat after their troops, to never gamble with them, and in general never ask anything from them that isn’t related to doing the job.

          Because consent cannot exist in a power imbalance. So yes the lunch swap has the exact same problem. Just with less trauma counseling.

          • Unbecredible@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            Don’t you think taking that hard-line stance kind of corners you into taking some nonsensical positions?

            For example a physical power imbalance will always exist between two men of different sizes. Because the imbalance is there, you have to answer with a hard no when someone asks: “is it possible for two men of different sizes to consent to sex with one another?” But if someone asks “is it okay for two guys of different sizes to have sex?” you would presumably say yes.

            Now you have been forced to say it is okay for sex to happen despite the impossibility of any consent having being given.