"Sexual assault is more than forcible rape. Any strategy which is designed to eliminate rejection or overcome someone's reluctance or indecision or non-participation or which reduces the other person's options is a strategy of sexual assault."
And FRS responded with this revealing snippet:
Did you get that? "Any" -- not just some, "any" strategy that is "designed to eliminate re[j]ection or overcome . . . resistance . . . ." So if you buy her dinner, or treat her nicely, or promise to go visit her mother with her, or agree to fix her car in an effort to "eliminate rejection" or "overcome [her] indecision" and thereby increase your chances of taking the relationship to the next level, you are acting out "a strategy of sexual assault." While it is written in a gender neutral manner, make no mistake it is designed to address male sexual advances because since the dawn of man, males have been the ones pursuing and females have been the ones playing "hard to get."What FRS is failing to notice is that there is a huge and important difference between overcoming someone's lack of consent and seeking freely given consent from another person.
Under this model a man who has communicated no interest in a sexual relationship with a particular woman can think certain non-sexual actions are earning him his way into a sexual relationship when they are not. At some point under this model the man will try to cash in his chips while fully expecting the woman who he assumes to be consenting through her gender and her presence in his company to play, "hard to get."
And "hard to get" will most likely be expressions of the woman's lack of consent. By definition expressions of lack of consent nullify the presence of consent which makes continuing an act of rape.
This model is dangerous for women but it is also dangerous for boys and men. This model makes it easy for boys and men to dismiss the absence of consent or to dismiss the presence of clear communication of non-consent as nothing more than an expected falsehood on her part which can be ignored.
This model sets up boys and men to rape and to then dismiss rightful accusations of rape as wrongful accusations.
What is the second worst part of this model is if the man directly communicated his sexual interest with the woman he was interested in rather doing task after task until he feels it is time to cash in his chips that woman might freely and eagerly consent.
Every time this model fails to get a boy or man the sex he expects that will likely build his resentment against women rather than revealing to him that the root of his problem is with the strategy and model he's using.
FRS's portrait of all men as predatory when it comes to sex slanders many men who do not deserve in any way to be lumped in with all the male sexual predators who paint themselves as victims when they are rightfully accused of sexual violence.
Update (8/23): I need to place a trigger warning on the comments from men who found this post through the Men Are Better Than Women forum.
Update (9/1): Results of a survey of teenagers in the UK about violence found:
One in three of the teenage girls questioned in England, Scotland and Wales said their boyfriends had tried to pressure them into unwanted sexual activity by using physical force or by bullying them.This shows the scope of the behavior FRS is trying to minimize or excuse. In comparison only 1 in 17 boys reported being pressured or forced into sexual activity.
The NSPCC said the unwanted sexual activity ranged from kissing to intercourse.
A quarter of the girls interviewed for the survey had suffered physical violence, including being slapped, punched or beaten.
This behavior of pressuring someone else should never be viewed as more acceptable than physical force. Agreement under pressure is not consent, only compliance.