Beyond enthusiasm: Rethinking consent
Is authentic consent always enthusiastic?
The concept of consent has evolved significantly over the decades, adapting to our growing understanding of personal autonomy, power dynamics, and human sexuality. Yet, the idea that consent must always be enthusiastic to be valid remains deeply ingrained, especially in sex-positive communities. This model is greatly championed and for all good reasons, as it strives to ensure that sexual interactions are not only consensual but actively desired and rooted in mutual agency. However, the question arises: is enthusiastic consent always the gold standard, applicable in every context? Or does it overlook the diverse reasons why people engage in sexual activity, potentially excluding or invalidating certain experiences?
Models of consent: a brief overview
To understand the significance of enthusiastic consent, it’s important to contrast it with earlier frameworks.
The “no means no” model focuses on the explicit refusal of consent. While straightforward, it fails to account for situations where someone may freeze in fear, making them unable to say “no,” or where verbal refusal could lead to physical harm, particularly for individuals socialised as women.
The “yes means yes” model introduced affirmative consent, emphasising that participation should be explicitly agreed upon. However, it also falls short when a "yes" is coerced, influenced by manipulation or given under duress.
This is where the enthusiastic consent model comes in, aiming to close these gaps. It posits that valid consent is not only freely given and withdrawable at any time but also active, wholehearted, and keen. It’s a model that prioritizes agency, autonomy, and desire, making it a cornerstone in sex-positive discourse.
But even this model has limitations, particularly in its assumption that all sexual activity should be grounded in desire and enthusiasm, as it risks alienating groups whose relationships with sex don’t fit neatly within this framework.
The Complexity of Enthusiastic Consent
The enthusiastic consent model assumes, as Dossie Easton famously put it, that sex is nice, and pleasure is good for you. While this belief may resonate with many, it doesn’t account for the multitude of reasons people engage in sexual activity. For some, sex is about pleasure, connection and intimacy but for others, it might also serve practical, emotional, or circumstantial purposes.
For couples trying to conceive, for example, sex might occasionally feel like a task rather than a source of excitement; their participation is rooted in a shared goal, not necessarily immediate passion. Similarly, to some sex is what pays the bills or secure financial stability, and their consent is given freely and with agency even if it doesn’t align with the idealised notion of enthusiasm.
Beyond desire
Sex is not always about lust or passion. It can fulfill emotional, relational and other needs, each valid. Some examples include:
Baby-making: couples trying to have a child may approach sex pragmatically, focusing on timing and frequency rather than spontaneity or enthusiasm.
Connection: many people on the asexual spectrum or with a lower libido engage in sex to strengthen their bond with a partner, valuing the relational aspect over desire.
Affirmation: as sex therapist Casey Tanner insightfully notes, sometimes the motivation for sex isn’t the act itself but the emotions it fosters—feeling wanted, being held, affirming attractiveness, or seeking a hormonal boost.
Compromise: some people choose to engage in sex as an act of “generosity” or compromise, prioritizing their partner’s needs or happiness. This can be a loving and consensual choice, even if it isn’t accompanied by personal excitement.
Work: For sex workers consent is professional and contractual. The enthusiastic component may not be present, yet their agency and boundaries remain intact.
None of these reasons diminish the validity of the consent involved. What matters is that participation is freely chosen and not coerced or manipulated.
By holding enthusiasm as the universal standard for authentic consent, we risk invalidating the experiences of those who approach sex differently. It creates a hierarchy of consent, where certain motivations are deemed more legitimate than others. This is counterproductive, as it undermines the agency of individuals making informed and intentional choices about their bodies and relationships. While enthusiastic consent is an excellent aspiration in many contexts, it’s essential to recognise that it doesn’t fit every scenario. Applying it universally could unintentionally exclude people whose experiences fall outside its scope.
A Nuanced Approach to Consent
Instead of promoting one-size-fits-all consent models, we should strive for a more inclusive understanding of consent that acknowledges diversity. At its core, valid consent must always be:
Freely given: participation must be voluntary and absent of coercion or manipulation.
Informed: all parties should have a clear understanding of the context and potential consequences.
Active and ongoing: consent must be revocable at any point.
Enthusiasm, while ideal in most situations, should not be the defining feature of consent. Recognising the many reasons people have sex allows us to embrace a more nuanced, empathetic, and inclusive perspective.
Final Thoughts
Consent is complex and deeply personal. While enthusiastic consent has rightfully become a popular model, it is not a universal standard. By understanding the diversity of human experiences and motivations, we can create a consent culture that respects all individuals, their choices, and their circumstances. Ultimately, what matters most is that consent is informed, voluntary, and rooted in respect, whether it’s enthusiastic or not.