About sexual consensus

Where is the discourse on sexual violence among gay and bisexual men? Our author explores this question.

Basically, it seems quite simple: No means no. Sexual consent goes hand in hand with active agreement to engage in sexual activity together at a certain point in time. Consent is about agreeing in advance what is pleasurable and not assuming that everything that happens during sex will be just right. This negotiation is also about being able to articulate your personal boundaries and respecting your partner's boundaries. In current feminist debates, this concept of negotiation and consent is discussed as part of the prevention of sexual violence. However, since we as sexual subjects do not always know what we want, our boundaries are not always clear and our preferences are also subject to change, this shows that the 'yes means yes' principle also has its limits when it comes to preventing sexual violence.

Breaking the silence

In recent years, the #MeToo movement and the exposure of sexual assault in the film industry have shown that consent and consensus are not so simple after all. In 2017, this movement made it possible to discuss sexism and sexual violence as a deep-rooted social problem of patriarchal domination and to negotiate issues of sexual consent. In 2022, however, it is striking that these issues have hardly been discussed in the media or academically among gay and bisexual men, even though there is a good chance, especially in this social climate, that the previous silence towards non-heterosexual victims of sexual violence will be broken and taken seriously.

However, the question of the lack of discourse on sexual violence among gay and bisexual men is not so easy to answer: on the one hand, it is quite possible that gay and bisexual men are affected by far fewer sexual assaults than women. However, a study from the UK reveals that 62 per cent of gay men surveyed had already been touched against their will at parties. On the other hand, studies since the 1970s or films show us that men were already dependent on non-verbal codes for gay sex such as public flaps decades ago in order to protect themselves from heterosexual male violence and to reassure themselves with the other person that they wanted the same thing. Consensus could therefore already represent a larger part of the biographical sexual socialisation of gay and bisexual men in relation to heterosexual men and women.

The matter of consensus

The lack of a broad debate shows that this is a complicated area of tension and that consensus functions and is negotiated differently in different contexts of gay subculture. The issue becomes even more complicated when it comes to substance use in the context of sexual encounters and in what state of intoxication gay and bisexual men are still able to articulate their desires.

So how is this complex interplay dealt with in the communities?

Although gay sex venues throughout Germany have been dying out for years, it is mainly gay saunas that are surviving comparatively well. It is amazing to observe the ways in which people try to establish closeness and contact there. In most cases, consensus and interest is signalled and negotiated non-verbally. For example, by reciprocating a touch when passing by in the steam sauna, a brief touch on the foot in the whirlpool or an interested look while sweating in the sauna. A shake of the head or a nod is often enough to know how the next few minutes will go for the sauna guests involved.

Unwanted touching

The situation is not so clear-cut in bars, however. In contrast to darkrooms or saunas, there is a controversial debate as to whether they are places of sexual permissiveness. Although bars are often not a place of refuge for sexual contact, they are sexually charged places for many gay and bisexual visitors and so unwanted touching can quickly become a crossing of boundaries. However, this ambiguity of the space also opens up the possibility of dealing with one's own discomfort and learning where one's own boundaries lie, how they can change and how they can be defended.

Consent becomes even more difficult in the darkroom. Does entering alone constitute consent for any sexual contact? Can two or more men who can barely see each other even come to an agreement? If you are lying in the sling, is that an impressive permission that everything can be done with you?

There is no clear yes or no to these questions, but they still need to be asked and discussed. Also against the background of substance use, which is still very popular among gay men.

Consent that blurs

In a unique study conducted in the UK by Adam Bourne in 2015, gay and bisexual men were asked about their substance use and sexual consent, among other things. In this study, three out of 30 men surveyed stated that they had been victims of non-consensual sex. Among other things, they reported having lost consciousness due to an overdose of GHB, only to realise afterwards that they had been penetrated anally. The penetration that took place in these circumstances was not consensual, yet the men interviewed were reluctant to describe it as sexual assault or rape despite finding the experience disturbing. In addition, other men in the study mentioned that they could not clearly answer the question of sexual consent in many situations. Many participants felt that the willingness to consent to sex at multi-day sex parties can become blurred.

When entering gay sexual spaces, be it darkrooms, saunas or (cruising) bars, we accept that sexual behaviour is a very welcome option and that everyone has the freedom to participate. Depending on the setting, unwanted touching does not always have to be sexual assault. However, saying no or communicating it differently must always be an option. In addition, gay and bisexual men must also be able to be sensitive to the fact that the other person may not be able to say no at times. For example, when substances have been consumed.

The necessary discourse

The discourse on sexual violence and the prevention of sexual assault in gay spaces is still lacking, even though numerous publications and awareness concepts already exist in heterosexual and queer-feminist contexts. However, the different settings and places of gay subculture described here, in which gay and bisexual men do not move exclusively as autonomous and rationally acting subjects who should know what they want at all times and should also be able to communicate this, show that the principle of consensus and consent as part of an awareness concept for the prevention of sexual violence is not sufficient. Rona Torenz argues in her book "Yes means yes? Feminist debates about consensual sex", Rona Torenz argues in favour of a more error-friendly sexual culture and a realistic approach to ambivalence and boundary transgressions, which she describes as part of sexuality and as a "multidimensionality of desire". In order to prevent sexual violence and assault, she therefore calls for less consensus morality, but rather the consistent visualisation and combating of power imbalances with the aim of enabling subjects to reflect. A demand that could prove to be particularly promising for a discourse on sexual violence among gay and bisexual men against the backdrop of the diverse sex locations of gay subculture.