The failed promise of consent in women's experiences of coercive and unwanted anal sex with men

Abstract

In this article, we critically interrogate the concept of consent in relation to women's experiences of coerced and unwanted heterosexual anal sex. Among the 18 women we interviewed (all living in New Zealand), some clearly labelled their experiences of unwanted anal sex with men as nonconsensual. Many others, however, suggested that they had, in some way, consented. We identified two main discursive patterns in the ways that women discussed consent in these contexts: one that equated it with resignation, mostly associated with experiences of verbal pressure, and another that reduced consent to a lack of resistance to unwanted and unexpected anal penetration. Through these women's accounts, it was clear that consent and coercion are not mutually exclusive. Overall, consent in these cases was scripted within a gendered dynamic that was premised on men's sexual entitlement and women's traditional roles as sexual caretakers and gatekeepers. We argue that women's accounts and reflections on consent in this context illuminate structural fragilities in the very concept of sexual consent as a marker of ethical sex. Consent was substantively distinct from sexual enthusiasm and mutuality. We conclude that it fails in its promise to protect women against sex that is coercive and hurtful.