Well, fuck. Getting harder and harder to 'separate the art from the artist'. Andrew Brettler, who has acted for Russell Brand, Danny Masterson, and Prince Andrew, represented Gaiman. Wallner said...
Well, fuck. Getting harder and harder to 'separate the art from the artist'.
Andrew Brettler, who has acted for Russell Brand, Danny Masterson, and Prince Andrew, represented Gaiman. Wallner said she is looking for new legal representation.
Not a good look. What about the public sentiment around these 3 men convinced Gaiman to hire Brettler?
To play devil's advocate: Public opinion for this sort of crime is not one where innocent until proven guilty applies. It's not clear that the reputation is savable once this kind of allegation is...
To play devil's advocate:
Public opinion for this sort of crime is not one where innocent until proven guilty applies. It's not clear that the reputation is savable once this kind of allegation is made. These 3 men have not faced legal consequences for their actions which might be the best Gaiman can hope for.
(This is true regardless of whether or not the allegations are ultimately true or not)
Ditto. And I was a fan of his work, but the book club book is very likely the last work of his I will consume, at least while he's still alive. Although, TBH, I struggle separating art from...
Ditto. And I was a fan of his work, but the book club book is very likely the last work of his I will consume, at least while he's still alive. Although, TBH, I struggle separating art from abhorrent artists even after they're long dead. :/
It also makes me sick to my stomach realizing now that the rape scenes in Sandman between Richard Madoc (the author with writer's block) and Calliope (his enslaved Greek Muse) might have been based on what Gaiman himself was actually doing to women.
Agreed. I'd previously listened to the audiobook, but by the time I saw the bookclub thread, accusations had come out, and I felt conflicted/uncomfortable taking part so didn't. Sad and angry...
Agreed. I'd previously listened to the audiobook, but by the time I saw the bookclub thread, accusations had come out, and I felt conflicted/uncomfortable taking part so didn't.
Sad and angry covers it. I only learned about Gaimen as an author mid-pandemic, and truthfully his stories and narrations in audiobooks essentially reignited my interest in books; I had more or less stopped reading entirelyfor years.
Of course, the interest remains and I've since been exploring lots of authors new to me, and there are many excellent audiobook narrators, but it's.. sad to say the least. If it came up, I'd have no interest now in sharing which author exactly reignited my interest in reading.
I want to lift two thoughts from a few skeets that I found particularly relevant. For some context I do follow a lot of SFF authors, which included Gaiman himself, and many authors (peers and...
I want to lift two thoughts from a few tweets skeets that I found particularly relevant. For some context I do follow a lot of SFF authors, which included Gaiman himself, and many authors (peers and acquaintances) and fans have been processing their feelings.
I'm seeing a startling number of folks on here express regret that they were kind to or in admiration of Gaiman, but the thing is, how you treat people isn't about them, it's about you.
If you were kind, respectful, or otherwise decent to someone who turned out awful, it's because YOU are decent.
You may have admitted the man, and that's because you're kind, and abusers can be very charming to the people they aren't abusing, both.
And 2.
I’m clinging hard to Daniel Radcliffe’s statement to The Trevor Project, which ends “If you found anything in these stories that resonated and helped you at any time in your life… that is between you and the book that you read and it is sacred.”
I know a lot of people were moved by Sandman, or The Graveyard Book, or any number of Gaiman's works. I will probably always hold hope for either Gaiman's or Pratchett's Death/DEATH to greet me when it's time. I hope to see the end of the Good Omens show, because Pratchett and the fans deserve it. None of us are bad people for having those connections to his work. Similarly none are bad people for having this sour or experience of his work and not wanting to promote or support it.
Handwringing over it doesn't do anything for the victims, it doesn't punish Gaiman. It just stresses you out.
Idk I felt this helped me a lot. Hope it helps someone.
The one about the woman with three young daughters at risk of being evicted by Gaiman was especially hard to read about. It's like some Victorian England backwards nonsense....
The one about the woman with three young daughters at risk of being evicted by Gaiman was especially hard to read about. It's like some Victorian England backwards nonsense....
What was the other podcast? I don't disbelieve Tortoise Media's reporting about this, but I have always been suspicious as to why it's them publishing this, so I would like to see a different...
What was the other podcast? I don't disbelieve Tortoise Media's reporting about this, but I have always been suspicious as to why it's them publishing this, so I would like to see a different source mention it.
Am I Broken I am also suspicious of Tortoise but there are transcripts (made by unaffiliated people) and the women's own words are shared. Here's a link roundup on Dreamwidth
These allegations are awful and my compassion goes out to K, Scarlett, Wallner, Hobsbawm, and any other victims of Gaiman. Even if elements of their relationships were consensual, it's apparent...
These allegations are awful and my compassion goes out to K, Scarlett, Wallner, Hobsbawm, and any other victims of Gaiman.
Even if elements of their relationships were consensual, it's apparent that (at best) Gaiman had/has no understanding of the principles of "safe, sane, and consensual" in BDSM. More likely, I think he simply doesn't care about consent. His personal pleasure is paramount and the women were just tools to him.
I don't even understand how you could enjoy something like this.
One grey area I find in this, however, is the criminality of Hobsbawm's experience:
In what Hobsbawm said was “an aggressive, unwanted pass”, Gaiman “jumped” on her “out of the blue”, forced his tongue into her mouth, and pushed her onto her sofa, before she wriggled free. Hobsbawm said she then cut off contact with Gaiman.
I have no doubt that this experience was deeply distressing for Hobsbawm and, as I said, my heart goes out to her. It sounds like Gaiman was overly aggressive in his approach.
But on the other hand, this situation raises a question I have struggled with my whole life: "Short of asking for consent before going in for a kiss (which is regrettably regarded as unattractive by most young people), how are you supposed to know beforehand if a kiss will be well-received?"
Truthfully, you cannot know with certainty. Even the best readers of body language can only make an educated guess.
Some people are completely oblivious to how flirty they are. Others are completely oblivious to how not flirty they are. Some people will say, "I can't believe so-and-so thought I was interested in them! I was just being nice and flirting in a friendly way!" Others will say, "I can't believe so-and-so didn't kiss me! Couldn't they tell from the way I made passing eye contact with them twice that I was burning up with desire for them???"
Going in for the kiss without verbal consent is always rolling the dice.
This uncertainty was such a concern for me as a young man that the majority of first kisses I had were actually initiated by the woman. (Although my romantic history is short).
Do you think the inherent risk of "going in for the kiss" will ever be solved? Will asking for consent ever become the norm? Or will a "base system" for kissing ever develop? (For example: Base 1 = hand touching, base 2 = face touch, base 3 = gentle kiss, base 4 = making out?).
If not, what do we do about the percentage of "incorrect guesses" that will inevitably occur? Obviously we can't have people just leaping on each other on the basis that "there was a 1% chance the other person would be into it!" But on the other hand, even someone who is 99% accurate at reading body language will still kiss someone who's not into it 1% of the time.
(Oct 7, 2024 edit) Returning to this post a couple months later, I'm not happy with how much it reads like apologizing on behalf of Gaiman.
My phrasing ("It sounds like Gaiman was overly aggressive in his approach") seriously diminishes how extreme and traumatizing his behaviour was. It also sounds like I'm accusing Hobsbawm of being unintentionally flirty ("Some people are completely oblivious to how flirty they are"), and like I'm suggesting that Gaiman was just a victim of random chance ("Even the best readers of body language can only make an educated guess.").
I won't alter my original words (I'll keep them up as a reminder to speak more carefully in the future), but I want to clarify my feelings here. Gaiman's behaviour was extreme, traumatic, and showed a complete lack of concern for Hobsbawm's feelings. A first kiss should be giving the other person every opportunity to reject you. Gaiman does none of that--he forces Hobsbawm to fight for her opportunity to break free of him. It frightens me to consider what might have happened if she wasn't up to the fight that day, or if she was someone who slipped more into the Fawn/Freeze responses than fight/flight.
I also want to make clear that I have always believed Hobsbawm's account that she was not being flirty with Gaiman and that his kiss came out of the blue. In my original post, my phrasing is terrible. I switch from talking about the specifics of the Hobsbawm-Gaiman case to philosophizing more generally about consent and the inherent risk of "going for a kiss" without verbal consent. It's only natural for readers to assume that I'm saying "Oh, this is just the inherent risk of going for a kiss." That's not what I'm saying, but I see how it sounds like that. That's why I'm adding this appendix to clarify my feelings.
Okay. Now that I've clarified my feelings on Hobsbawm/Gaiman, I'm going to transition to a more general discussion about how to approach a consensual kiss. Included in this discussion is a breakdown of the steps you should take if you want to kiss someone on a couch.
I know I'm breaking this down way too much, but (as I said elsewhere) I really think that more information is better in this case. That's especially true for people who are neurodivergent.
I won't get into setting the moment and flirting (lord knows how many guides to flirting there are online) but those are critical parts of setting the moment for a first kiss. This isn't the movies. People don't leap on each other out of nowhere in real life. (They shouldn't, at least). I'll start my guide at the moment you decide to try for the kiss (which again, should ONLY come after a period of flirting).
All right, here goes...
There have been a lot of failed kisses throughout history. Most of them have not been traumatic.
From what I have read and heard, what makes a kiss traumatizing is feeling like something was done to you without you being able to express your own desires (either verbally or by pulling away). A slow, gentle kiss is not going to traumatize someone if they have plenty of time to react and can freely pull away.
So: if you are trying to initiate a kiss, either ask verbally for consent or gauge non-verbal consent. Either way: you shouldn't interfere with someone else's bodily autonomy at any point during the first kiss. Do not move their body for them or prevent them from moving. No holding the other person in place, pushing them up against a wall, restricting their movement, etc. You can put your hands lightly on the other person (which is another great opportunity to gauge the other person's interest/non-interest) but do NOT try to stop them from moving. They should be able to pull their head back to break the kiss at any point.
In the case of non-verbal consent: approach slowly. Give the other person plenty of time to understand what's happening. This can even be a fun way to draw out the tension of the moment. When you're an inch or two away, pause. Let the other person close that last bit of distance. If they don't, I would suggest saying something in a flirty/teasing tone, like, "What would you say if I tried to kiss you?" You might even give up on being indirect at this point and ask, "Can I kiss you?" (Asking at this point is not going ruin the moment or turn a yes into a no--when you're an inch or two away, the other person already knows if they're going to kiss you). Licking your lips or looking at the other person's lips are also good ways to express your intention and may happen involuntarily (look for these as signs of interest in the other person too!).
The first kiss should be delicate. (Gentleness isn't going to spoil the moment either). The best part about going gently at first is that you leave opportunity to ramp up later. No tongue on the first kiss. Again: save something for later.
If the first kiss goes well, your brain is probably going to go off-line for the next 30 seconds or so while the two of you continue to gently explore. At that point, you can consider trying to French kiss. Once again, this should be tentative. You're not shoving your tongue in the other person's mouth: you're seeing how they respond to you slipping your tongue just a little bit past their lips.
You might also be interested in kissing on the couch. I don't see why the hell you wouldn't just say, "Let's go to the couch," but if you again want to go for nonverbal, I'd pull apart briefly to indicate (using your head, hand, maybe a light hand on their back, etc.) that you want to go to the couch. See how they respond. Do not move their body for them.
And there you go. You're French kissing on the couch. Even here, you should be periodically checking in to see how the other person is doing. I usually just say, "If there's anything you don't want to do, just let me know."
So long as you genuinely care about whether or not the other person is enjoying the experience, this will all feel extremely natural. It looks overwhelming written down, but if you're the type of person who's willing to read multiple paragraphs about how to kiss someone without violating their consent or traumatizing them, have faith in yourself--you care about people. You're not going to force someone into anything they're uncomfortable with. In the event that you misread the moment, you will probably both be embarrassed--but neither of you will be traumatized.
I think that pushing someone down onto a couch and sticking a tongue into their mouth is a series of actions with plenty of time to figure out if they're into it. Even the process of getting into...
I think that pushing someone down onto a couch and sticking a tongue into their mouth is a series of actions with plenty of time to figure out if they're into it. Even the process of getting into someone's personal space and going in for a closed mouth kiss gives plenty of time to read someone's personal cues. It seems overly generous to frame Gaiman's actions as resulting from obliviousness, especially against a background of other assaults and the significant power differential.
Honestly, these things happens so fast that I don't know if there was enough time to see if Hobsbawm was into it. I think therein lies Gaiman's crime: he didn't give Hobsbawm anywhere near enough...
I think that pushing someone down onto a couch and sticking a tongue into their mouth is a series of actions with plenty of time to figure out if they're into it.
Honestly, these things happens so fast that I don't know if there was enough time to see if Hobsbawm was into it.
I think therein lies Gaiman's crime: he didn't give Hobsbawm anywhere near enough time to signal her interest/disinterest before going too far physically. If he'd approached with a gentle kiss, we probably wouldn't be talking about this. But from the sounds of it, things went straight from conversation to his mouth on hers (meaning she can't speak up) and him pushing her down to the couch (muddling a clear physical signal of interest/disinterest from her).
As I said in another post I think it's valuable to break down exactly where the crime lies so that people can better understand how they can avoid committing similar crimes while still participating in romantic/sexual relationships.
For (Edit:Folks who aren't sure) Asking is sexy. Consent is very sexy. And maybe you don't want to be with people who won't communicate and get mad when you can't read minds. With that said, if...
Exemplary
For young people: (Edit:Folks who aren't sure)
Asking is sexy. Consent is very sexy. And maybe you don't want to be with people who won't communicate and get mad when you can't read minds.
With that said, if you insist on not asking:
Try to sit closer together first without touching. If the person gets up, even if they're saying they need the washroom or "oh wow look at this interesting thing" or "you want another drink " or whatever -- this person is putting distance between you. Stop here. Do not pass go do not collect $200.
If they seem okay sitting close, try turning towards them and initiate eye contact without moving into their space. If they reciprocate, cool. If they are looking at your hair or collar or past you, try softly saying their name to see if they'll return eye contact. If they laugh or try to make casual conversation or call attention to the movie or grab their phone, it's not time for a kiss. If they get up, Stop here. Do not pass go do not collect $200.
Take a few long seconds to hold that eye contact. Take a few long seconds to tilt your head slightly. If they close their eyes and lean into your space, (but you can still consider asking in your best sexy voice first before you) go for it.
If it's a stalemate, move extremely slowly into their space. If they freeze or lean back or break eye contact, back off. Do not connect the kiss until they at least make some effort to close the distance.
If you try this kinda thing twice and you don't get clear consent, it's time for talking about the nature of your relationship using words. Don't just keep trying without talking.
Don't move quickly into someone's space.
Don't surprise someone with kiss.
Do not corner them into a couch or bed or corner - do not try to kiss someone in your car or if they'll still need a ride home after your attempt. Do not try to kiss someone who is working for you or need you to do something for them or talk to someone on their behalf.
Do not hold their shoulders or hold the back of their head before you try to move in for a kiss basically don't do movie stuff and definitely don't do any pornography stuff.
Caveat: And if consent isn't sexy for you as a person it's the bare minimum. So do it anyway. Like washing your hands even if you think you didn't pee on them. ಠ_ಠ
Caveat:
And if consent isn't sexy for you as a person it's the bare minimum. So do it anyway. Like washing your hands even if you think you didn't pee on them. ಠ_ಠ
This is all good advice, but tbqh I don't think young people are necessarily more in need of it than older people. Younger people are more likely to have been exposed to these ideas already, in my...
This is all good advice, but tbqh I don't think young people are necessarily more in need of it than older people. Younger people are more likely to have been exposed to these ideas already, in my experience.
I think it is making it more complicated than it needs to. Simply asking is less awkward and less risky than potentially hurting someone. I somehow managed to do it with my now wife, despite being...
I think it is making it more complicated than it needs to. Simply asking is less awkward and less risky than potentially hurting someone. I somehow managed to do it with my now wife, despite being the nerdy introverted awkward teenager.
And from what I can understand from talking and listening to women, who are mostly on the receiving end of this, the advances they mostly want to be free from are those coming completely out of the blue with minimal prior contact. Like the groping from behind, being licked in the ear without warning or someone throwing themselves at them like that encounter with Gaiman. I at least haven't heard many feel assaulted by someone going slowly with eye contact in for a kiss after an initial intimate conversation for example. And if in doubt, can't hurt to ask.
I don't know if asking for consent should be skipped just because it seems "awkward" to the people involved? If someone says no, then it's embarrassing and awkward, but it can't be any more...
I don't know if asking for consent should be skipped just because it seems "awkward" to the people involved?
If someone says no, then it's embarrassing and awkward, but it can't be any more embarrassing than if you had actually kissed someone who didn't want to be? Asking also gives you the opportunity to show that you can respect that person's boundaries, which I think may be easier to recover from if you want to keep talking to that person as friends than getting a kiss wrong.
Or if you're asking someone who does want to be kissed by you, do you think that they would change their mind and suddenly not want to kiss just because you asked? If checking in with someone ruins the whole thing for them, you may have saved yourself from a lot of issues later.
Sometimes people don't know what they want either. A lot of emotions aren't black and white and asking gives the other person time to assess. I really don't see any downsides to asking that would be worse than going for a kiss and getting it wrong.
Don't get me wrong: I would love for asking for a kiss to become the norm. I think it's by far the least dangerous way to initiate a kiss. I think the concern is that asking for a kiss can make a...
Don't get me wrong: I would love for asking for a kiss to become the norm. I think it's by far the least dangerous way to initiate a kiss.
I think the concern is that asking for a kiss can make a man appear unconfident, and confidence is widely regarded as being attractive to women. I think it's also seen as a little unromantic, possibly because it doesn't fit with courtship in traditional media (which tends to follow a very stereotyped pattern of "man grabs woman and kisses her passionately--no questions asked").
One way to help normalize asking for consent might be through media, actually: start showing characters asking, "Can I kiss you?" (or similar) before going in for the first kiss.
I think another way might be to flip the script on what asking for consent before kissing implies about someone's personality. A little bit like you've done above, where you've reframed asking as an act of bravery rather than self-doubt: "Asking for consent isn't unconfident--it's the ultimate show of bravery. Asking for consent is showing respect for women, and that's sexy."
I have some doubts about how well this will translate to real life (are people going to buy that asking "can I kiss you?" = confident?) but I think it could start to move the needle.
Gonna be honest, the "Asking for consent: it's not confident and women want confidence" thing is not something I've heard from women (or myself) my entire life. Which means that message is coming...
Gonna be honest, the "Asking for consent: it's not confident and women want confidence" thing is not something I've heard from women (or myself) my entire life.
Which means that message is coming from men.
I'm telling you right now that if you say "may I kiss you" with (that internalized need for ) confidence, it's not going to be perceived as awkward. And if you're shy, it's cute. There's not a lose here unless someone wasn't into you in the first place.
Tiktok example this one is queer but most are talking about hetero relationships, this one was just snappier.
(Ooh boy don't look at YouTube though it's all just "I kissed my guy friend" and "kissed her without asking")
Sorry allow me to rephrase: in my opinion that message is coming primarily from and amplified by men. I don't always speak with precision when talking about more casual topics because I think it...
that doesn't at all follow. i think it's a weak point even if the conclusion is true; the rest stands alone
Sorry allow me to rephrase: in my opinion that message is coming primarily from and amplified by men.
I don't always speak with precision when talking about more casual topics because I think it makes me sound angry.
Of course there are some women out there saying shit. But in my 20+ adult years I've never seen that be pushed as any sort of narrative in women's spaces. I've consistently heard it from men, and seen it from men who are influencers and PUAs and the like. When I've dated or flirted with women, they like a "may I kiss you"
Meanwhile on Booktok women are gushing over men asking for consent. So in my personal and experienced opinion, it comes from men.
my point was 1) your personal experience has a lot of selection bias and 2) the rest of your comment stands (and imo is stronger) independently of how exactly the narrative is being promoted. not...
my point was 1) your personal experience has a lot of selection bias and 2) the rest of your comment stands (and imo is stronger) independently of how exactly the narrative is being promoted. not so sure of #2 now, though; maybe it can't be completely independent. maybe it's more that 'coming from men' is not descriptive or specific enough to be very interesting. i can't make much of your examples—pick up artists and booktok seems like a rigged game on both sides. the men have heard it from—which men, in what contexts, why?
My personal experience does have a lot of selection bias. But, you'd think I'd have heard it at least once in some virtual or IRL space. I can't guarantee to where men are hearing it from, but it...
My personal experience does have a lot of selection bias. But, you'd think I'd have heard it at least once in some virtual or IRL space.
I can't guarantee to where men are hearing it from, but it seems to be predominantly from other men. Whether that's a PUA or a guy who passed it on, or someone that internalized something or whatever. Sorry if that isn't interesting enough? It doesn't really matter which men. The point is generally that it would be at least a little helpful to listen to the POV of people you're wanting to kiss, whether individually or categorically, on the topic of how they want to be kissed. But maybe I'm wrong, idk, can only speak for my experience after all.
Booktok is another unique subculture for sure, but I use it as an easy contrast and a demonstration of what I notice as a pattern - women can tell men what they want and men insisting that's not true.
Tbh I think it's less that people really think consent is a mood killer and more that they're so anxious about being rejected they want to rush past it hoping it won't matter and the narrative that supports that outcome is that "consent is a mood killer." Because "I'm too scared to be turned down" expressed a lack of confidence.
But all that could be me overestimating genuine anxiousness and underestimating how much people want to violate consent.
'men' and 'women' are extremely large and heterogeneous, and i don't really know what 'men are doing x; women are doing y' means. gender does partition, but so, for instance, do class and...
'men' and 'women' are extremely large and heterogeneous, and i don't really know what 'men are doing x; women are doing y' means. gender does partition, but so, for instance, do class and geography, imo more potently in many respects. so can you say that (straight) men, as a category, are trying to kiss (straight) women? i don't think so. (already i had to leave out the gays!)
'it would be at least a little helpful to listen to the POV of people you're wanting to kiss, whether individually or categorically, on the topic of how they want to be kissed' smells to me like 'men are from mars; women are from venus'—'here, the secret venutian customs and desires'. not unlike pickup artistry in form, even if not content!
i see two directions that i think are interesting and moral. one is normative—dating advice, to anybody reading the comment: if somebody wants to kiss you, but would be put off by your asking, that is unreasonable. here, any mention of gender is suspect; not unlikely sexist. the other is positive—some people believe certain things; which people are these, and why do they believe what they believe? here, saying that 'men' believe some things or promote some ideas simply doesn't tell you very much about the state of the world or what we can do about it
Yes they are, but I deliberately simplified as the conversation seemed to be about straight men wanting to kiss straight women. As one of the bisexuals/pansexuals/queers, and a non-binary woman,...
men' and 'women' are extremely large and heterogeneous, and i don't really know what 'men are doing x; women are doing y' means. gender does partition, but so, for instance, do class and geography, imo more potently in many respects. so can you say that (straight) men, as a category, are trying to kiss (straight) women? i don't think so. (already i had to leave out the gays!)
Yes they are, but I deliberately simplified as the conversation seemed to be about straight men wanting to kiss straight women.
As one of the gays bisexuals/pansexuals/queers, and a non-binary woman, who writes too many parenthetical, I was deliberately reductive. But if we must be super serious about this, ok I guess.
'it would be at least a little helpful to listen to the POV of people you're wanting to kiss, whether individually or categorically, on the topic of how they want to be kissed' smells to me like 'men are from mars; women are from venus'—'here, the secret venutian customs and desires'. not unlike pickup artistry in form, even if not content!
I think quite the opposite. I think asking the individuals in question "do you like to be asked to be kissed or surprised when the mood is right" might be incredibly helpful to a specific relationship. I'm always in favor of more honest and open communication. On the other hand categorically, I think broadly women will be more knowledgeable about what women want than men will be about what women want. This isn't because the genders are a mystery to each other from other planets who must follow The Rules and perform gender roles, but because of how gender segregated friendships are in American society and that overall we're socialized to befriend within our own (perceived or assigned) gender more than in heterogender-ous groups. Because dating advice (and sex education) is traditionally passed down in binary gendered spaces and they're quite often not talking to each other. So I'd rather have men for example seek advice from women so they can hear from women's mouths what they want rather than perpetuate the grade school model of passing on what they heard about what women want. Also I said "at least a little helpful" and you've decided this is tantamount to pick up artistry. ಠ_ಠ Nah.
(Nonbinary and bisexual people are, of course, fully confused by both taxes and the rules of curling and don't really know what we want at all. I know I said I'd be serious, but I don't really want to be.)
i see two directions that i think are interesting and moral. one is normative—dating advice, to anybody reading the comment: if somebody wants to kiss you, but would be put off by your asking, that is unreasonable. here, any mention of gender is suspect; not unlikely sexist.
Everyone should be getting consent before kissing other people. It's also accurate to acknowledge the social expectation of men being the "actor" in a dating relationship and respond to a conversation that at least as far as I could tell was about men kissing women, to mention gender.
I don't see much suspect there unless the entire conversation was fraught. Maybe it was, as I said, I was being deliberately reductive due to the beginning of the thread.
the other is positive—some people believe certain things; which people are these, and why do they believe what they believe? here, saying that 'men' believe some things or promote some ideas simply doesn't tell you very much about the state of the world or what we can do about it
It might not, but that's because it wasn't the discussion I was really intending to have.
Given that this is a thread about an abusive cis man that sexually assaulted multiple women, I do feel like this is unnecessary in this space. I'm happy to discuss relationships and consent from queer perspectives, but not really with this vibe of how "suspect", "immoral", or "uninteresting" my posts are, nor under this particular heading.
I am going to advocate for consent regardless. Because the evidence of what happens when there isn't consent is at the top of this page.
I do agree with you that we need to see more consent like this in media, but I also agree with what DefinitelyNotAFae is saying about women in real life not sharing the idea that asking for...
I do agree with you that we need to see more consent like this in media, but I also agree with what DefinitelyNotAFae is saying about women in real life not sharing the idea that asking for consent means you lack confidence.
When it comes down to it, you're kissing another person, not a character. If you want to know how to interact with people, you have to actually interact with people, you can't just learn from watching movies or other media. I obviously don't know every woman ever, but I don't know any who would say "I wanted to kiss this guy but then he asked me if he could, so he's obviously not confident and I can't be with him."
Asking is showing you have the confidence to go for a kiss, but also that you care about what the other person wants. Going for a kiss without asking is like saying "you might not want this, but I do, so I'm going to do it" even if it's not portrayed like that in the media, that's how it translates to real life.
This article has real women coming forward saying "this makes me uncomfortable." The woman who was kissed regrets not calling him out for it at the time. Asking is a very low risk thing to do to make sure you're not in a situation like that.
Whether asking makes a man appear unconfident or not, it is his duty to not sexually assault women. As a result, he needs to know she wants whatever he's doing before he does it. The most...
Whether asking makes a man appear unconfident or not, it is his duty to not sexually assault women. As a result, he needs to know she wants whatever he's doing before he does it. The most unambiguous way to do this is to ask verbally, but there are other alternatives depending on the circumstances. Another way is to start with the classic "lean-in" so that she has time to reciprocate or reject you. Personally I think this is more awkward in the case of a rejection as asking, but I can see how some might prefer it if she reciprocates.
Anything that involves forcefully grabbing someone or pinning them down absolutely requires you to know in advance that they want it. This almost definitely requires pre-negotiation even if you're confident they're fine with a random kiss. I wouldn't even do those things to my wife without asking first.
Speaking in general- No, because sex is one of the most risky things life on earth does. I'm being serious. Reproduction is when the rubber meets the road. Incredible risk, incredible reward. That...
Do you think the inherent risk of "going in for the kiss" will ever be solved?
Speaking in general- No, because sex is one of the most risky things life on earth does. I'm being serious. Reproduction is when the rubber meets the road. Incredible risk, incredible reward.
That doesn't mean we as people can't learn to treat each other well. But we're grappling with urges that have existed since the very beginning- we shouldn't be too surprised when they prove hard to control.
//
Speaking more specifically about wanted or unwanted kisses- a little grace from all involved goes a long way, and as long as everyone is acting honestly, it's ok to misread and be embarrassed. People make genuine mistakes with no ill intent.
The problems arise when no's aren't respected, and that is a real, big problem. But that should be thought of as different than an honest misqueue, because it is very different. One is a social flub. The other a much more dangerous behavior. They aren't the same. Like MimicSquid said, there's a world of difference between going in for a slow, closed-mouth kiss (while reading reactions as you go) and forcefully pushing someone down on a couch with no warning. They are completely different behaviors, and only one is defensible.
I think you've hit the nail on the head here. Gaiman's approach was WAY too aggressive and didn't allow for a gradual "feeling out" of how receptive Hobsbawm was to his advances. (That's something...
Speaking more specifically about wanted or unwanted kisses- a little grace from all involved goes a long way, and as long as everyone is acting honestly, it's ok to misread and be embarrassed. People make genuine mistakes with no ill intent.
The problems arise when no's aren't respected, and that is a real, big problem. But that should be thought of as different than an honest misqueue, because it is very different. One is a social flub. The other a much more dangerous behavior. They aren't the same. Like MimicSquid said, there's a world of difference between going in for a slow, closed-mouth kiss (while reading reactions as you go) and forcefully pushing someone down on a couch with no warning. They are completely different behaviors, and only one is defensible.
I think you've hit the nail on the head here.
Gaiman's approach was WAY too aggressive and didn't allow for a gradual "feeling out" of how receptive Hobsbawm was to his advances. (That's something of a theme across all these acts--a complete disregard for how the other person might feel).
It's possible to initiate a kiss and still read signs for consent. And I think that you're right that most people tend to be pretty gracious about handling a misread provided the initial kiss is gentle.
I think the sort of questions I've posed are important in so far as they break down exactly what Gaiman's crime was with respect to Hobsbawm so that the public can better understand how they can avoid committing the same crime in the future.
These sorts of things are rarely discussed in frank, nuts-and-bolts terminology, and that's a disservice to young people everywhere.
So there you go, young people reading this: try for the gentle kiss first.
I don't know if I count as a "young person" (31) but my husband asked permission before kissing me for the first time and I thought it was insanely attractive.
I don't know if I count as a "young person" (31) but my husband asked permission before kissing me for the first time and I thought it was insanely attractive.
I've never read a Neil Gaiman book. I used to feel bad that I'd never read any of his works, especially since I hang out with a lot of goths who worship him. Lately, I haven't felt too bad about...
I've never read a Neil Gaiman book. I used to feel bad that I'd never read any of his works, especially since I hang out with a lot of goths who worship him.
Lately, I haven't felt too bad about this hole in my literary knowledge.
Well, fuck. Getting harder and harder to 'separate the art from the artist'.
Andrew Brettler, who has acted for Russell Brand, Danny Masterson, and Prince Andrew, represented Gaiman. Wallner said she is looking for new legal representation.
Not a good look. What about the public sentiment around these 3 men convinced Gaiman to hire Brettler?
To play devil's advocate:
Public opinion for this sort of crime is not one where innocent until proven guilty applies. It's not clear that the reputation is savable once this kind of allegation is made. These 3 men have not faced legal consequences for their actions which might be the best Gaiman can hope for.
(This is true regardless of whether or not the allegations are ultimately true or not)
Not to nitpick because I do kind of agree but Danny Masterson did get convicted last fall to 30 years in prison.
I wish this news had come out before the book club selected Ocean at the end of the lane.
This makes me sad and angry.
Ditto. And I was a fan of his work, but the book club book is very likely the last work of his I will consume, at least while he's still alive. Although, TBH, I struggle separating art from abhorrent artists even after they're long dead. :/
It also makes me sick to my stomach realizing now that the rape scenes in Sandman between Richard Madoc (the author with writer's block) and Calliope (his enslaved Greek Muse) might have been based on what Gaiman himself was actually doing to women.
Agreed. I'd previously listened to the audiobook, but by the time I saw the bookclub thread, accusations had come out, and I felt conflicted/uncomfortable taking part so didn't.
Sad and angry covers it. I only learned about Gaimen as an author mid-pandemic, and truthfully his stories and narrations in audiobooks essentially reignited my interest in books; I had more or less stopped reading entirelyfor years.
Of course, the interest remains and I've since been exploring lots of authors new to me, and there are many excellent audiobook narrators, but it's.. sad to say the least. If it came up, I'd have no interest now in sharing which author exactly reignited my interest in reading.
I want to lift two thoughts from a few
tweetsskeets that I found particularly relevant. For some context I do follow a lot of SFF authors, which included Gaiman himself, and many authors (peers and acquaintances) and fans have been processing their feelings.You may have admitted the man, and that's because you're kind, and abusers can be very charming to the people they aren't abusing, both.
And 2.
I know a lot of people were moved by Sandman, or The Graveyard Book, or any number of Gaiman's works. I will probably always hold hope for either Gaiman's or Pratchett's Death/DEATH to greet me when it's time. I hope to see the end of the Good Omens show, because Pratchett and the fans deserve it. None of us are bad people for having those connections to his work. Similarly none are bad people for having this sour or experience of his work and not wanting to promote or support it.
Handwringing over it doesn't do anything for the victims, it doesn't punish Gaiman. It just stresses you out.
Idk I felt this helped me a lot. Hope it helps someone.
Oh, no. "Two more?" This is the first I've heard of any of this.
Original article from last month. Don't think it got posted here.
The one about the woman with three young daughters at risk of being evicted by Gaiman was especially hard to read about. It's like some Victorian England backwards nonsense....
This brings the total to 5, with 4 women speaking with Tortoise Media and another speaking to a separate podcast.
What was the other podcast? I don't disbelieve Tortoise Media's reporting about this, but I have always been suspicious as to why it's them publishing this, so I would like to see a different source mention it.
Am I Broken
I am also suspicious of Tortoise but there are transcripts (made by unaffiliated people) and the women's own words are shared.
Here's a link roundup on Dreamwidth
Thank you!
It's hard to ignore even 1 claim, but 5 is basically confirmation.
These allegations are awful and my compassion goes out to K, Scarlett, Wallner, Hobsbawm, and any other victims of Gaiman.
Even if elements of their relationships were consensual, it's apparent that (at best) Gaiman had/has no understanding of the principles of "safe, sane, and consensual" in BDSM. More likely, I think he simply doesn't care about consent. His personal pleasure is paramount and the women were just tools to him.
I don't even understand how you could enjoy something like this.
One grey area I find in this, however, is the criminality of Hobsbawm's experience:
I have no doubt that this experience was deeply distressing for Hobsbawm and, as I said, my heart goes out to her. It sounds like Gaiman was overly aggressive in his approach.
But on the other hand, this situation raises a question I have struggled with my whole life: "Short of asking for consent before going in for a kiss (which is regrettably regarded as unattractive by most young people), how are you supposed to know beforehand if a kiss will be well-received?"
Truthfully, you cannot know with certainty. Even the best readers of body language can only make an educated guess.
Some people are completely oblivious to how flirty they are. Others are completely oblivious to how not flirty they are. Some people will say, "I can't believe so-and-so thought I was interested in them! I was just being nice and flirting in a friendly way!" Others will say, "I can't believe so-and-so didn't kiss me! Couldn't they tell from the way I made passing eye contact with them twice that I was burning up with desire for them???"
Going in for the kiss without verbal consent is always rolling the dice.
This uncertainty was such a concern for me as a young man that the majority of first kisses I had were actually initiated by the woman. (Although my romantic history is short).
Do you think the inherent risk of "going in for the kiss" will ever be solved? Will asking for consent ever become the norm? Or will a "base system" for kissing ever develop? (For example: Base 1 = hand touching, base 2 = face touch, base 3 = gentle kiss, base 4 = making out?).
If not, what do we do about the percentage of "incorrect guesses" that will inevitably occur? Obviously we can't have people just leaping on each other on the basis that "there was a 1% chance the other person would be into it!" But on the other hand, even someone who is 99% accurate at reading body language will still kiss someone who's not into it 1% of the time.
(Oct 7, 2024 edit) Returning to this post a couple months later, I'm not happy with how much it reads like apologizing on behalf of Gaiman.
My phrasing ("It sounds like Gaiman was overly aggressive in his approach") seriously diminishes how extreme and traumatizing his behaviour was. It also sounds like I'm accusing Hobsbawm of being unintentionally flirty ("Some people are completely oblivious to how flirty they are"), and like I'm suggesting that Gaiman was just a victim of random chance ("Even the best readers of body language can only make an educated guess.").
I won't alter my original words (I'll keep them up as a reminder to speak more carefully in the future), but I want to clarify my feelings here. Gaiman's behaviour was extreme, traumatic, and showed a complete lack of concern for Hobsbawm's feelings. A first kiss should be giving the other person every opportunity to reject you. Gaiman does none of that--he forces Hobsbawm to fight for her opportunity to break free of him. It frightens me to consider what might have happened if she wasn't up to the fight that day, or if she was someone who slipped more into the Fawn/Freeze responses than fight/flight.
I also want to make clear that I have always believed Hobsbawm's account that she was not being flirty with Gaiman and that his kiss came out of the blue. In my original post, my phrasing is terrible. I switch from talking about the specifics of the Hobsbawm-Gaiman case to philosophizing more generally about consent and the inherent risk of "going for a kiss" without verbal consent. It's only natural for readers to assume that I'm saying "Oh, this is just the inherent risk of going for a kiss." That's not what I'm saying, but I see how it sounds like that. That's why I'm adding this appendix to clarify my feelings.
Okay. Now that I've clarified my feelings on Hobsbawm/Gaiman, I'm going to transition to a more general discussion about how to approach a consensual kiss. Included in this discussion is a breakdown of the steps you should take if you want to kiss someone on a couch.
I know I'm breaking this down way too much, but (as I said elsewhere) I really think that more information is better in this case. That's especially true for people who are neurodivergent.
I won't get into setting the moment and flirting (lord knows how many guides to flirting there are online) but those are critical parts of setting the moment for a first kiss. This isn't the movies. People don't leap on each other out of nowhere in real life. (They shouldn't, at least). I'll start my guide at the moment you decide to try for the kiss (which again, should ONLY come after a period of flirting).
All right, here goes...
There have been a lot of failed kisses throughout history. Most of them have not been traumatic.
From what I have read and heard, what makes a kiss traumatizing is feeling like something was done to you without you being able to express your own desires (either verbally or by pulling away). A slow, gentle kiss is not going to traumatize someone if they have plenty of time to react and can freely pull away.
So: if you are trying to initiate a kiss, either ask verbally for consent or gauge non-verbal consent. Either way: you shouldn't interfere with someone else's bodily autonomy at any point during the first kiss. Do not move their body for them or prevent them from moving. No holding the other person in place, pushing them up against a wall, restricting their movement, etc. You can put your hands lightly on the other person (which is another great opportunity to gauge the other person's interest/non-interest) but do NOT try to stop them from moving. They should be able to pull their head back to break the kiss at any point.
In the case of non-verbal consent: approach slowly. Give the other person plenty of time to understand what's happening. This can even be a fun way to draw out the tension of the moment. When you're an inch or two away, pause. Let the other person close that last bit of distance. If they don't, I would suggest saying something in a flirty/teasing tone, like, "What would you say if I tried to kiss you?" You might even give up on being indirect at this point and ask, "Can I kiss you?" (Asking at this point is not going ruin the moment or turn a yes into a no--when you're an inch or two away, the other person already knows if they're going to kiss you). Licking your lips or looking at the other person's lips are also good ways to express your intention and may happen involuntarily (look for these as signs of interest in the other person too!).
The first kiss should be delicate. (Gentleness isn't going to spoil the moment either). The best part about going gently at first is that you leave opportunity to ramp up later. No tongue on the first kiss. Again: save something for later.
If the first kiss goes well, your brain is probably going to go off-line for the next 30 seconds or so while the two of you continue to gently explore. At that point, you can consider trying to French kiss. Once again, this should be tentative. You're not shoving your tongue in the other person's mouth: you're seeing how they respond to you slipping your tongue just a little bit past their lips.
You might also be interested in kissing on the couch. I don't see why the hell you wouldn't just say, "Let's go to the couch," but if you again want to go for nonverbal, I'd pull apart briefly to indicate (using your head, hand, maybe a light hand on their back, etc.) that you want to go to the couch. See how they respond. Do not move their body for them.
And there you go. You're French kissing on the couch. Even here, you should be periodically checking in to see how the other person is doing. I usually just say, "If there's anything you don't want to do, just let me know."
So long as you genuinely care about whether or not the other person is enjoying the experience, this will all feel extremely natural. It looks overwhelming written down, but if you're the type of person who's willing to read multiple paragraphs about how to kiss someone without violating their consent or traumatizing them, have faith in yourself--you care about people. You're not going to force someone into anything they're uncomfortable with. In the event that you misread the moment, you will probably both be embarrassed--but neither of you will be traumatized.
I think that pushing someone down onto a couch and sticking a tongue into their mouth is a series of actions with plenty of time to figure out if they're into it. Even the process of getting into someone's personal space and going in for a closed mouth kiss gives plenty of time to read someone's personal cues. It seems overly generous to frame Gaiman's actions as resulting from obliviousness, especially against a background of other assaults and the significant power differential.
Honestly, these things happens so fast that I don't know if there was enough time to see if Hobsbawm was into it.
I think therein lies Gaiman's crime: he didn't give Hobsbawm anywhere near enough time to signal her interest/disinterest before going too far physically. If he'd approached with a gentle kiss, we probably wouldn't be talking about this. But from the sounds of it, things went straight from conversation to his mouth on hers (meaning she can't speak up) and him pushing her down to the couch (muddling a clear physical signal of interest/disinterest from her).
As I said in another post I think it's valuable to break down exactly where the crime lies so that people can better understand how they can avoid committing similar crimes while still participating in romantic/sexual relationships.
For
young people:(Edit:Folks who aren't sure)Asking is sexy. Consent is very sexy. And maybe you don't want to be with people who won't communicate and get mad when you can't read minds.
With that said, if you insist on not asking:
Try to sit closer together first without touching. If the person gets up, even if they're saying they need the washroom or "oh wow look at this interesting thing" or "you want another drink " or whatever -- this person is putting distance between you. Stop here. Do not pass go do not collect $200.
If they seem okay sitting close, try turning towards them and initiate eye contact without moving into their space. If they reciprocate, cool. If they are looking at your hair or collar or past you, try softly saying their name to see if they'll return eye contact. If they laugh or try to make casual conversation or call attention to the movie or grab their phone, it's not time for a kiss. If they get up, Stop here. Do not pass go do not collect $200.
Take a few long seconds to hold that eye contact. Take a few long seconds to tilt your head slightly. If they close their eyes and lean into your space, (but you can still consider asking in your best sexy voice first before you) go for it.
If it's a stalemate, move extremely slowly into their space. If they freeze or lean back or break eye contact, back off. Do not connect the kiss until they at least make some effort to close the distance.
If you try this kinda thing twice and you don't get clear consent, it's time for talking about the nature of your relationship using words. Don't just keep trying without talking.
Don't move quickly into someone's space.
Don't surprise someone with kiss.
Do not corner them into a couch or bed or corner - do not try to kiss someone in your car or if they'll still need a ride home after your attempt. Do not try to kiss someone who is working for you or need you to do something for them or talk to someone on their behalf.
Do not hold their shoulders or hold the back of their head before you try to move in for a kiss basically don't do movie stuff and definitely don't do any pornography stuff.
Caveat:
And if consent isn't sexy for you as a person it's the bare minimum. So do it anyway. Like washing your hands even if you think you didn't pee on them. ಠ_ಠ
This is all good advice, but tbqh I don't think young people are necessarily more in need of it than older people. Younger people are more likely to have been exposed to these ideas already, in my experience.
Touche :) thanks
I think it is making it more complicated than it needs to. Simply asking is less awkward and less risky than potentially hurting someone. I somehow managed to do it with my now wife, despite being the nerdy introverted awkward teenager.
And from what I can understand from talking and listening to women, who are mostly on the receiving end of this, the advances they mostly want to be free from are those coming completely out of the blue with minimal prior contact. Like the groping from behind, being licked in the ear without warning or someone throwing themselves at them like that encounter with Gaiman. I at least haven't heard many feel assaulted by someone going slowly with eye contact in for a kiss after an initial intimate conversation for example. And if in doubt, can't hurt to ask.
I don't know if asking for consent should be skipped just because it seems "awkward" to the people involved?
If someone says no, then it's embarrassing and awkward, but it can't be any more embarrassing than if you had actually kissed someone who didn't want to be? Asking also gives you the opportunity to show that you can respect that person's boundaries, which I think may be easier to recover from if you want to keep talking to that person as friends than getting a kiss wrong.
Or if you're asking someone who does want to be kissed by you, do you think that they would change their mind and suddenly not want to kiss just because you asked? If checking in with someone ruins the whole thing for them, you may have saved yourself from a lot of issues later.
Sometimes people don't know what they want either. A lot of emotions aren't black and white and asking gives the other person time to assess. I really don't see any downsides to asking that would be worse than going for a kiss and getting it wrong.
Don't get me wrong: I would love for asking for a kiss to become the norm. I think it's by far the least dangerous way to initiate a kiss.
I think the concern is that asking for a kiss can make a man appear unconfident, and confidence is widely regarded as being attractive to women. I think it's also seen as a little unromantic, possibly because it doesn't fit with courtship in traditional media (which tends to follow a very stereotyped pattern of "man grabs woman and kisses her passionately--no questions asked").
One way to help normalize asking for consent might be through media, actually: start showing characters asking, "Can I kiss you?" (or similar) before going in for the first kiss.
I think another way might be to flip the script on what asking for consent before kissing implies about someone's personality. A little bit like you've done above, where you've reframed asking as an act of bravery rather than self-doubt: "Asking for consent isn't unconfident--it's the ultimate show of bravery. Asking for consent is showing respect for women, and that's sexy."
I have some doubts about how well this will translate to real life (are people going to buy that asking "can I kiss you?" = confident?) but I think it could start to move the needle.
Gonna be honest, the "Asking for consent: it's not confident and women want confidence" thing is not something I've heard from women (or myself) my entire life.
Which means that message is coming from men.
I'm telling you right now that if you say "may I kiss you" with (that internalized need for ) confidence, it's not going to be perceived as awkward. And if you're shy, it's cute. There's not a lose here unless someone wasn't into you in the first place.
Tiktok example this one is queer but most are talking about hetero relationships, this one was just snappier.
(Ooh boy don't look at YouTube though it's all just "I kissed my guy friend" and "kissed her without asking")
that doesn't at all follow. i think it's a weak point anyway even if the conclusion is true; the rest stands alone
Sorry allow me to rephrase: in my opinion that message is coming primarily from and amplified by men.
I don't always speak with precision when talking about more casual topics because I think it makes me sound angry.
Of course there are some women out there saying shit. But in my 20+ adult years I've never seen that be pushed as any sort of narrative in women's spaces. I've consistently heard it from men, and seen it from men who are influencers and PUAs and the like. When I've dated or flirted with women, they like a "may I kiss you"
Meanwhile on Booktok women are gushing over men asking for consent. So in my personal and experienced opinion, it comes from men.
my point was 1) your personal experience has a lot of selection bias and 2) the rest of your comment stands (and imo is stronger) independently of how exactly the narrative is being promoted. not so sure of #2 now, though; maybe it can't be completely independent. maybe it's more that 'coming from men' is not descriptive or specific enough to be very interesting. i can't make much of your examples—pick up artists and booktok seems like a rigged game on both sides. the men have heard it from—which men, in what contexts, why?
My personal experience does have a lot of selection bias. But, you'd think I'd have heard it at least once in some virtual or IRL space.
I can't guarantee to where men are hearing it from, but it seems to be predominantly from other men. Whether that's a PUA or a guy who passed it on, or someone that internalized something or whatever. Sorry if that isn't interesting enough? It doesn't really matter which men. The point is generally that it would be at least a little helpful to listen to the POV of people you're wanting to kiss, whether individually or categorically, on the topic of how they want to be kissed. But maybe I'm wrong, idk, can only speak for my experience after all.
Booktok is another unique subculture for sure, but I use it as an easy contrast and a demonstration of what I notice as a pattern - women can tell men what they want and men insisting that's not true.
Tbh I think it's less that people really think consent is a mood killer and more that they're so anxious about being rejected they want to rush past it hoping it won't matter and the narrative that supports that outcome is that "consent is a mood killer." Because "I'm too scared to be turned down" expressed a lack of confidence.
But all that could be me overestimating genuine anxiousness and underestimating how much people want to violate consent.
'men' and 'women' are extremely large and heterogeneous, and i don't really know what 'men are doing x; women are doing y' means. gender does partition, but so, for instance, do class and geography, imo more potently in many respects. so can you say that (straight) men, as a category, are trying to kiss (straight) women? i don't think so. (already i had to leave out the gays!)
'it would be at least a little helpful to listen to the POV of people you're wanting to kiss, whether individually or categorically, on the topic of how they want to be kissed' smells to me like 'men are from mars; women are from venus'—'here, the secret venutian customs and desires'. not unlike pickup artistry in form, even if not content!
i see two directions that i think are interesting and moral. one is normative—dating advice, to anybody reading the comment: if somebody wants to kiss you, but would be put off by your asking, that is unreasonable. here, any mention of gender is suspect; not unlikely sexist. the other is positive—some people believe certain things; which people are these, and why do they believe what they believe? here, saying that 'men' believe some things or promote some ideas simply doesn't tell you very much about the state of the world or what we can do about it
Yes they are, but I deliberately simplified as the conversation seemed to be about straight men wanting to kiss straight women.
As one of the
gaysbisexuals/pansexuals/queers, and a non-binary woman, who writes too many parenthetical, I was deliberately reductive. But if we must be super serious about this, ok I guess.I think quite the opposite. I think asking the individuals in question "do you like to be asked to be kissed or surprised when the mood is right" might be incredibly helpful to a specific relationship. I'm always in favor of more honest and open communication. On the other hand categorically, I think broadly women will be more knowledgeable about what women want than men will be about what women want. This isn't because the genders are a mystery to each other from other planets who must follow The Rules and perform gender roles, but because of how gender segregated friendships are in American society and that overall we're socialized to befriend within our own (perceived or assigned) gender more than in heterogender-ous groups. Because dating advice (and sex education) is traditionally passed down in binary gendered spaces and they're quite often not talking to each other. So I'd rather have men for example seek advice from women so they can hear from women's mouths what they want rather than perpetuate the grade school model of passing on what they heard about what women want. Also I said "at least a little helpful" and you've decided this is tantamount to pick up artistry. ಠ_ಠ Nah.
(Nonbinary and bisexual people are, of course, fully confused by both taxes and the rules of curling and don't really know what we want at all. I know I said I'd be serious, but I don't really want to be.)
Everyone should be getting consent before kissing other people. It's also accurate to acknowledge the social expectation of men being the "actor" in a dating relationship and respond to a conversation that at least as far as I could tell was about men kissing women, to mention gender.
I don't see much suspect there unless the entire conversation was fraught. Maybe it was, as I said, I was being deliberately reductive due to the beginning of the thread.
It might not, but that's because it wasn't the discussion I was really intending to have.
Given that this is a thread about an abusive cis man that sexually assaulted multiple women, I do feel like this is unnecessary in this space. I'm happy to discuss relationships and consent from queer perspectives, but not really with this vibe of how "suspect", "immoral", or "uninteresting" my posts are, nor under this particular heading.
I am going to advocate for consent regardless. Because the evidence of what happens when there isn't consent is at the top of this page.
Can confirm.
i don't mean to attack you, and i think you have interpreted much of what i wrote differently from how i meant it
that was my point
ok
Fwiw I don't feel attacked, but I agree I must be misunderstanding you if we're that far off base. It may just be an off night.
💜
I do agree with you that we need to see more consent like this in media, but I also agree with what DefinitelyNotAFae is saying about women in real life not sharing the idea that asking for consent means you lack confidence.
When it comes down to it, you're kissing another person, not a character. If you want to know how to interact with people, you have to actually interact with people, you can't just learn from watching movies or other media. I obviously don't know every woman ever, but I don't know any who would say "I wanted to kiss this guy but then he asked me if he could, so he's obviously not confident and I can't be with him."
Asking is showing you have the confidence to go for a kiss, but also that you care about what the other person wants. Going for a kiss without asking is like saying "you might not want this, but I do, so I'm going to do it" even if it's not portrayed like that in the media, that's how it translates to real life.
This article has real women coming forward saying "this makes me uncomfortable." The woman who was kissed regrets not calling him out for it at the time. Asking is a very low risk thing to do to make sure you're not in a situation like that.
Whether asking makes a man appear unconfident or not, it is his duty to not sexually assault women. As a result, he needs to know she wants whatever he's doing before he does it. The most unambiguous way to do this is to ask verbally, but there are other alternatives depending on the circumstances. Another way is to start with the classic "lean-in" so that she has time to reciprocate or reject you. Personally I think this is more awkward in the case of a rejection as asking, but I can see how some might prefer it if she reciprocates.
Anything that involves forcefully grabbing someone or pinning them down absolutely requires you to know in advance that they want it. This almost definitely requires pre-negotiation even if you're confident they're fine with a random kiss. I wouldn't even do those things to my wife without asking first.
Speaking in general- No, because sex is one of the most risky things life on earth does. I'm being serious. Reproduction is when the rubber meets the road. Incredible risk, incredible reward.
That doesn't mean we as people can't learn to treat each other well. But we're grappling with urges that have existed since the very beginning- we shouldn't be too surprised when they prove hard to control.
//
Speaking more specifically about wanted or unwanted kisses- a little grace from all involved goes a long way, and as long as everyone is acting honestly, it's ok to misread and be embarrassed. People make genuine mistakes with no ill intent.
The problems arise when no's aren't respected, and that is a real, big problem. But that should be thought of as different than an honest misqueue, because it is very different. One is a social flub. The other a much more dangerous behavior. They aren't the same. Like MimicSquid said, there's a world of difference between going in for a slow, closed-mouth kiss (while reading reactions as you go) and forcefully pushing someone down on a couch with no warning. They are completely different behaviors, and only one is defensible.
I think you've hit the nail on the head here.
Gaiman's approach was WAY too aggressive and didn't allow for a gradual "feeling out" of how receptive Hobsbawm was to his advances. (That's something of a theme across all these acts--a complete disregard for how the other person might feel).
It's possible to initiate a kiss and still read signs for consent. And I think that you're right that most people tend to be pretty gracious about handling a misread provided the initial kiss is gentle.
I think the sort of questions I've posed are important in so far as they break down exactly what Gaiman's crime was with respect to Hobsbawm so that the public can better understand how they can avoid committing the same crime in the future.
These sorts of things are rarely discussed in frank, nuts-and-bolts terminology, and that's a disservice to young people everywhere.
So there you go, young people reading this: try for the gentle kiss first.
I don't know if I count as a "young person" (31) but my husband asked permission before kissing me for the first time and I thought it was insanely attractive.
I've never read a Neil Gaiman book. I used to feel bad that I'd never read any of his works, especially since I hang out with a lot of goths who worship him.
Lately, I haven't felt too bad about this hole in my literary knowledge.