Boston Students Discuss “Yes Means Yes’’ and Affirmative Consent
California’s landmark “Yes Means Yes’’ law was big news last week. The legislation promises to redefine how college students have sex, requiring them to give “affirmative consent’’ for every stage of a sexual encounter; under the law, colleges that receive state funding for student financial assistance must abide by these guidelines when assessing assault, stalking, and rape incidents that occur both on and off campus.
Similar plans of action are in the works at all 64 SUNY campuses in New York and via a bill draft by Rep. Renny Cushing in New Hampshire.
But that’s elsewhere. Here in the Boston area, only one third of the college students we surveyed last week had even heard of “Yes Means Yes,’’ and while the vast majority were able to offer their own definition of “affirmative consent,’’ its place within a law was difficult for them to comprehend.
Here’s what we did:
On Thursday and Friday, we asked 56 Harvard students and 51 Boston University students (59 percent of them female) the following questions:
∙ Do you know about California’s “Yes Means Yes’’ law?
∙ What does “affirmative consent’’ mean to you?
∙ Would you feel more safe on campus if Massachusetts adopted the “Yes Means Yes’’ law?
Only 35 of 107 interviewed claimed they had heard of the law. If they hadn’t, we explained its premise. Almost all of them—104—were able to provide their own interpretation of the term “affirmative consent.’’
Some were textbook thorough: “Affirmative consent is unambiguous, clear expression of willingness throughout sexual activity,’’ said one female Harvard sophomore. “Obviously the clearest way is verbal, and when in doubt I don’t think it’s unreasonable to expect that we solicit clear expressions of willingness, which might not be verbal. There’s a huge difference between someone who’s freezing up and someone who’s actively participating.’’
Others were colloquial: “It should be enthusiastic ‘yes, this is what I want,’ and then you’re all good,’’ said a male Harvard senior. “Anything other than that is a no.
Another got straight to the point: “Two clear-minded people that are not under the influence of any other substances, verbally committing to each other,’’ said a male Boston University senior. “I don’t think it can be non-verbal.’’
Fifty-three of the students polled left room for interpretation when discussing physical versus verbal consent.
“If two people are in a committed relationship and they’ve had sex for a long period of time then they know the way they express themselves from a long period of experience,’’ said a male Harvard freshman. “They could probably have a pretty good sense when the other party is comfortable.’’
“If you’re comfortable enough with your partner you should be able to read each other’s body language,’’ said a female Harvard junior. “But I don’t know how many people can say they’re comfortable enough with their partner to always give that signal.’’
A number of students saw problems with giving the term a specific definition.
“I don’t think that every time someone doesn’t explicitly say yes they’re not consenting, but it definitely makes things a little bit muddier and more tricky,’’ said a male Harvard senior. “[Sexual assault] is just such a deeply rooted cultural thing too. The de-facto process of giving consent might not change right away. It’s hard to enforce.’’
For 13 of the students, being in a relationship—or otherwise viewing each other as regular sexual partners—was a factor that could negate the need for verbal consent.
“If there’s a hookup situation where you just met somebody then there definitely has to be a yes,’’ one female Harvard freshman said. “But if you’ve been dating somebody for two years and know each other well and know when yes means yes, then I think that’s a little different.’’
A gender divide only became visible when we asked if they would feel “more safe’’ on campus if Massachusetts adopted a “Yes Means Yes’’ law of its own. Sixty-two percent of the students said the law would make them feel safer, and 68 percent of those were female.
“It would set a critical standard for our expectations,’’ said a female sophomore at Harvard.
According to one male BU senior, the problem lies with the enforcement of the policy: “Whether you define ‘no means no’ and ‘yes means yes,’ that’s not really gonna change the person that’s committing the act. If you want to stop something non-consensual from happening, you have to get to the people and not just make some law that changes the definition of things.’’
“I think [the law] is a step in the right direction, but I don’t think that it will make college campuses safer,’’ said a male junior at Harvard. “Ultimately, I think most of the people who are going to be sexually assaulting people aren’t going to care if there’s a ‘yes means yes’ law. I feel like they’re going to do what they want to do, regardless of what the law says.’’
Tufts University was the only area school we could find whose sexual assault policy explicitly outlines what affirmative consent means. Boston University’s policy acknowledges “affirmative consent,’’ but does not define it. Harvard is the only Ivy League university that does not have an “affirmative consent’’ policy in place and skirts the issue in its Title IX policy.
While our pool was shallow, unscientific, and limited to Harvard and BU, 97 percent of those we asked were able to define affirmative consent–something their schools have yet to do. When—or how soon—will the universities follow their lead?
To comment, please create a screen name in your profile
To comment, please verify your email address
Conversation
This discussion has ended. Please join elsewhere on Boston.com