Scarleteen

Hello!

I’ve been thinking a lot about alcohol and consent, and I keep finding conflicting information. Some people say a drunk person can not consent, some people say the real issue is “incapacitation,” some people say it just depends on how everyone feels after and it’s just a riskier situation, etc. I’d love to get someone’s Input on this! Growing up, a lot of kids experimented with sex and alcohol at the same time, and I know a ton of people who still continue to have drunk sex and feel ok about it. I know it’s best to wait for all parties to be sober, but are all of these situations sexual assault even if everyone feels ok about it after?

Amethyst, just so you know, I did see this and start to respond, but it's the tail end of my workday, it's been a long day, and conversations that have anything to do with abuse or assault tend to take a lot out of me.

So, I'm going to hold my response until tomorrow, but obviously others -- be they staff or community members -- may come in before I get back. If not, I'll be back to this tomorrow and appreciate your patience.

Heather,

Thanks so much! Take all the time you need

Hey Amethyst,

Welcome to the boards You have touched on a tricky subject! You are right that the rule is people under the influence of substances can not give consent. You are also right that people do have sex under the influence of substances, and sometimes it's fine for everybody involved.

Everyone is gonna have a different response to this subject (so other users and staff, please feel free to join in!) but here is what I will say:

(To be clear, when I say sex, I mean any type of sexual activity.)

Sex is a vulnerable and intense thing that requires a lot of communication and checking-in. Even with a lot of communication and checking-in there can still be miscommunication and hurt feelings. Since sex is a vulnerable and intense thing, when miscommunication and hurt feelings do happen, it tends to be more painful and/or confusing than it might be in a lower-stakes situation. And that's with everyone SOBER. So when you add alcohol, marijuana, and/or other substances into the mix, everything gets exponentially trickier. So, it's safest to stick to sober sex!

In terms of whether "the real issue is incapacitation,” in my searching I found a university's (Darmouth's) website that seems to say that. They say that someone can give consent while intoxicated but not while incapacitated. Personally, I do not think the issue is just incapacitation. Their website describes signs of incapacitation as inability to speak coherently, confusion on basic facts (day of the week, birthdate, etc.), inability to walk unassisted, and passing out, and signs of intoxication as slurred speech, weaving or stumbling while walking, and exaggerated emotions. You are right that when someone is incapacitated they absolutely cannot give consent. Period. But there are plenty of other states of being under the influence where one's decision-making is impaired, far before passing out--for example what that website describes as being intoxicated. It's important to remember that someone who is slurring their words, stumbling while walking, and experiencing heightened emotions is not in their normal state. They should be assumed to not be able to give consent.

I think one way you could think of it is like with drinking and driving. Drunk driving is never ok and is always illegal. Some adults might have one or two drinks and drive and that's ok--as long as they feel clear-headed and in control behind the wheel, and have a blood alcohol level of less than .08%. Exactly how many drinks they feel comfortable having before driving is going to be different for each person. Other adults might never combine alcohol and driving, because they know that isn't safe or comfortable for them. Other adults don't drink alcohol at all, driving or no driving. We can connect this to people's experiences with sex. Some people might feel comfortable having sex after having a drink or two, some people might never want to mix alcohol and sex, some people might not be interested in sex, drinking, or both.

But it's also not just about the driver, it's about the other people involved too. Passengers in a car need to make sure they are comfortable with the state the driver is in before getting in for the ride. If someone really wants to drive, but has clearly had too much to drink, it's important that others keep them safe. If someone doesn't feel comfortable driving, no matter how much they have drank and how "fine" they seem, it would not be ok for someone to pressure them into driving. These same things go for sex, except even more so.

A few other thoughts:
-- Sometimes when someone says they feel totally fine after having drunk sex, they might not actually feel totally fine but aren't sharing that, or might later realize they don't feel totally fine. So it's important we make room for that.
-- When two people are both really drunk they can't usually make most types of sex happen. Drunk people are pretty sloppy and all over the place. So if two really drunk people have sex, it's possible one of those people is significantly less drunk than the other. It's also possible that person was aware of this power imbalance and was assaulting the other person.
-- Sexual assault is unfortunately very prevalent in our world today, and while alcohol and drugs are by no means always involved, they often are. Predators might use drugs and alcohol in their attempts to rape someone, and others might incorporate drugs and alcohol in their victim-blaming ("She was so drunk so she was asking for it.") We need to keep these realities in mind as we talk about the relationship between sex + alcohol, and be extra thoughtful.

I offered you a lot here. What do you think of all this? How does this line up with how you are thinking about things? Are these questions based in a specific experience of yours or a friends? If so, do you want to share more about that?

Thanks Alice! I do have a ton of questions based in my own experiences and those of friends. Would it be ok to talk about that here?

Yep go for it! Just make sure you don't use your friends real names Also, if you have any follow-up questions or thoughts about that big ole essay I wrote, feel free to share.

Would it be possible for me to discuss this privately with someone? If not that is totally fine and I can type my response here.

Scarleteen offers chat services on Monday, Wednesday, and Friday from 2-5pm PCT. If you are free during one of those windows you could come chat with someone then. http://www.scarleteen.com/our_live_chat_service

Otherwise, message boards are your best bet. We make sure that people's identities are kept private (no real names and minimal personal information). We like to keep them public because it means others who have similar questions and concerns to you can read your thread and learn from them.

It's up to you which you prefer!

I'm heading off from work now but someone will be back in tomorrow Have a good night Amethyst!

Great, thanks!

Everything that you said makes a lot of sense to me. However, talking with friends about this and looking back on my own experiences, I get caught up in the "grey area" sometime. I'll provide some examples if that helps:

- In high school, many people I knew were experimenting with alcohol and sex at the same time. So a lot of drunk sex happened-- in different ways and to different degrees. Many people also didn't drink, but would hook up with people who were drinking, since hook ups tended to happen at parties. I think it's safe to say that many of the people I knew would not have found anything wrong with a sober person making out with a really drunk person, for example. While I think all of this was dangerous and certainly not best practice, I hesitate to call it all sexual assault. 1) Just because of how many people did it. Not to say that that fact makes it OK, but because it was a pretty big part of the party context and many people did it and feel OK about it after. (Although I totally see your point about someone saying they feel OK about while actually feeling violated-- which is completely valid). 2) I think it was generally due to a lack of consent education rather than a malicious desire to take advantage of drunk people. How much should we fault people for not really understanding consent that well?

- In a college context, hooking up while drunk is still very prevalent. As a person who did not drink when I started school, I often struggled with navigating hook up culture when a lot of people seemed to be doing it while intoxicated. One time, I hooked up with a person when they biked over to my place after a party. They were talking coherently, moving fine, and seemed normal. I assumed that if they were able to bike and communicate so normally, they were sober or at the most a little drunk. We started kissing and before things went any further I asked, "Sorry, but you're not like, really drunk or anything, right?" (smooth, I know) to which he chuckled and said "no." Later, I asked him about the hook up and he mentioned that he had been drunk. When I checked in with him about this, he said he felt comfortable and had actually never been with someone who was so verbal about consent, so he remembered it all very fondly. This situation always confuses me when thinking about alcohol and consent. If he felt fine about it, and even felt like it was an "above average" hook up in terms of consent, does that mean it was still non-consensual because he was drunk?

- I have a friend who freaked out once because she and her boyfriend had sex after a long day of drinking and she later learned that her her boyfriend was still drunk. She assumed that he was sober because she didn't really understand how long it took for someone to sober up after being really drunk (really drunk for her is like, 2 shots, which means she gets sober pretty quickly). He even said he felt sober before they had sex. Scientifically, however, she realized that couldn't have been the case since he had been really drunk only a few hours ago. Again, if he felt ok about it, I feel like it would be wrong to call that sexual assault. But I'm totally open to other opinions on that!

Sorry for these long examples, and if whoever responds to this doesn't feel like engaging with them, no worries! I guess I have a few broader questions that might be easier to respond to:

- Should we label something as sexual assault if someone genuinely does feel OK about it? Like me, for example. I have been with people while I was drunk (definitely more than tipsy) and had a really good time.
- When does lack of knowledge make someone a perpetrator of sexual assault? I know this is a big question, so no need to answer it if you'd rather not. But would a high school student who used to hook up with drunk people be a sexual assailant if they genuinely didn't know that behavior was harmful?
- Does it make any difference if the drunk person initiated the encounter? I've been in situations where I was sober and the other person wasn't, which wasn't a good decision on my part, but they came onto me and ended up pressuring me into things. Does that mean we both took advantage of each other?
- Is it inherently more predatory for a sober person to hook up with a drunk person than for two drunk people to hook up? I understand that there's a power imbalance, but it also seems like it could be safer if the sober person genuinely cared about the wellbeing of their partner and was paying attention to their verbal and bodily cues in terms of consent.
-And lastly, do you see a difference between someone making out while drunk v. having penetrative sex (for eg) while drunk? Someone once said to me that they saw less potential for harm with a make out. I generally agree with that, and I think that might be why some of my friends felt ok with what happened in high school. They may not have felt violated by making out while drunk, but would have if it had gone further. Would that still make the make out sexual assault, if they were intoxicated and not in a place to be giving consent?

Sorry for this super long response! Thank you again for all your help.

I think one of the tough things I am seeing -- and this might have been why last night I felt a little overwhelmed -- is what sounds like the idea that if something is normalized, or common, it can't be abuse or assault. Like:

I hesitate to call it all sexual assault. 1) Just because of how many people did it. Not to say that that fact makes it OK, but because it was a pretty big part of the party context and many people did it and feel OK about it after. (Although I totally see your point about someone saying they feel OK about while actually feeling violated-- which is completely valid). 2) I think it was generally due to a lack of consent education rather than a malicious desire to take advantage of drunk people. How much should we fault people for not really understanding consent that well?

or:

Again, if he felt ok about it, I feel like it would be wrong to call that sexual assault.

Violence and abuse are, unfortunately, one of the most common things in our human world. They have been for a very, very long time. Heck, our history includes things like actual traditions of kidnapping and raping brides. Sexual abuses and assaults, specifically, are one of the most common and normalized things there are and always have been.

That many people have engaged in sexual activity with people who are drunk, or while drunk, just doesn't mean it can't have been abusive or not assault. I'd posit that that idea is one to seriously reconsider, because it's always made it much harder to get any kind of abuse recognized (for example, physical child abuse in families was long denied as abuse because "everyone did it.").

I also don't think asking people to take responsibility for their behaviour is faulting them, but that's perhaps a longer conversation for another time.

I'm having to steer myself a little away from this, because I'm still finding it's cueing some of my own trauma for some reason (tbh, I don't entirely know why, even as a survivor of multiple assaults and abuses, and someone who came of age in drug culture in the 80s, I can usually talk about this topic pretty easily and well: maybe in a few days if you still want to I can have another go and it might help for me to just start the conversation rather than reacting to your questions, if that makes sense). But I do want to say something about frameworks of figuring out what assault is, and why basing it on how "everyone" (I put that in quotes since it so rarely actually is that way) feels later, after an action, is problematic, jut as something for you to chew on.

What defines sexual assault isn't about how everyone who was involved in a potential or actual assault feels about it. That wouldn't ever work for a bunch of reasons, the least of which is that it's very common when there has been sexual activity and intoxicants for people NOT to feel the same about it, and for the person who feels they may have been or were assaulted to feel unable to say so, and to feel cultural and social pressure to say it wasn't assault. But more to the point:

What defines sexual assault is actions, and that's largely about what someone actively has done with or without consent. And that includes the given that it is everyone's responsibility to seek consent with any kind of sex, and to do what we can to assure anything sexual we are doing with someone sexually is consensual, through things like clearly communicating by asking questions, and by not doing sexual things we want if we don't have or can't get clear consent, or if we're just not sure.

The way we define sexual assault right now, particularly in sexuality and relationships education, in healthcare and in human services, is generally like this: sexual abuse or assault is what we call it when one or more people do something sexual to someone else without their express consent. And when it comes to alcohol, what that typically means in practice (including often in legal practice) varies fairly widely. Sober people using alcohol (like by giving someone drinks before being sexual with them) to facilitate sexual activity have engaged in drug-or--alcohol facilitated sexual assault (and any idea that's benign is, I'd personally say, naive), for example, something that happens often. Separate from that, when you're talking about everyone being drunk, we generally look at things like differences in ability, agency or levels of intoxication (for example, someone who CAN engage in sex with someone, per their body parts functioning, is generally much less intoxicated than someone who is half passed out on a couch), but it is always a given that once anyone is intoxicated, full consent is iffy at best, because intoxicants impair judgement as part of who they work.

When we're talking about legal definitions, that varies a lot from state to state and nation to nation, but modern laws around sexual abuse and assault generally consider it assault when someone does something sexual to someone who is too intoxicated to consent, by default. That's sound, because laws need to be broad and general, and then considered on a case by case basis, you know? And when they do, they usually will consider things like actual blood alcohol levels when they can, the context of how someone got intoxicated, if everyone involved was intoxicated (and how much, factoring in important differences like the level of function people had) and so forth. Too, bear in mind that it is generally up to people if they press charges or not, AND sexual assault is a crime that is less prosecuted than almost any other. I think some of what has me a little twitchy here is a feeling (which may or may not be valid, as I said, I'm feeling a bit triggered for some reason) like you might be more concerned with someone being accused of abuse or assault than someone being abused or assaulted, a concern that I find quite backwards and misplaced whenever I hear people voicing it.

Outside the law, this is still about actions, but if you're looking for any one solid, black-and-white assessment, you're not likely to find it. This is always about case-by-case, and while certainly a good deal of that assessment is going to be based on what everyone involved feels and has to say about it, it also often involves more objective information, like what any witnesses saw, like the greater context of things -- and that can include if the social culture a thing happened in normalizes mixing booze and sex, something that, again, often makes people who have been abused feel less able to say so.

I also want to add that when we're talking about things like underage drinking (or other recreational drug use) + sex and young people, by all means, people are going to and often do make mistakes and do shitty things, sexual abuse or assault among them. I don't think we help anyone, though, by -- if that's what's happening -- trying to find ways to not consider abuse or assault abuse or assault instead of accepting or asking for responsibility to be taken. After all, if we make it okay or make it seem okay when people are young to have sex with people when anyone isn't fully able to consent, that pattern is likely to just continue and get worse. We can't turn around rape culture that way, you know what I mean? We're only just starting to see more people be able to even say they have been assaulted, and only starting to decrease our rates of sexual abuse and assault because we're making clear how vital informed, real consent is, and that does include things like people being sober enough to consent and to be sexual with others consensually.

I feel like what's under all this is a concern that you yourself may have either or both been a victim of some kind of sexual abuse or assault or a perpetrator. I want to be clear that booze or no booze, drunk or not drunk isn't all there is to sexual abuse or assault. (For instance, you talk about experiencing sexual coercion from someone intoxicated that it sounds like may have resulted in you doing sexual things you did not want to, and the mere fact that you were sober and they were not certainly does not mean you were not abused all by itself.) I do think that if that's the concern under all of this, it might be more sound to talk about that more specifically and directly rather than trying to talk about this so broadly, including because again, separate from laws and very basic definitions, this just isn't the kind of thing where there are clear black-and-white answers. But I also understand if that feels too loaded.

I have zero idea if anything I've just added here was helpful, but it's the best I can do right now. My apologies for being less effective at this conversation than usual, and I'm sorry I can't quite put my finger on why. I hope you know that it's not about there being anything wrong with you asking these questions, there's not. <3

Hi Heather,

Thank you for the thoughtful reply even while feeling triggered. Please take all the time you need and just know that there's no pressure on my end for you to continue to engage. I do think some of what I said came across in a way I didn't intend, so I'm going to try to rephrase some of it within the context of my own life.

First, I want to say that I agree that everyone should be sober in order to engage in sexual activity. That's not a question in my mind. It's clearly the best course of action. The issue for me is that sometimes it feels like sex education around alcohol and consent seems a bit out of touch with reality-- hence my desire to seek clarity. When I say that a lot of people engage in sexual activity while drunk, I'm not saying that I think that should be the norm, or that people can't/ aren't abused in those situations. What has me confused are blanket statements that all situations like that are automatically sexual assault, without considering how someone actually experienced it. Like I said, from my own anecdotal evidence, TONS of people in high school and college around me engaged in that behavior. A lot of it I'm sure resulted in feelings of violation, trauma, and general unhappiness. At the same time, I think it can feel patronizing to be told that all encounters with alcohol and sex are automatically rape/ sexual assault. Speaking with friends (and these are actual conversations, I'm not just making them up to get my point across), and from my own experience, a lot of drunken make outs/ hook ups haven't resulted in trauma for us. Maybe that's because we're lucky, and if someone else would feel violated by that it's totally valid. I just get confused when statements like "a drunk person can't consent" are said because it feels out of touch with my reality and that of others around me. It seems to leave out a lot of nuance. I have gone to a club with the intention of hooking up with a guy I had a crush on, accidentally gotten too drunk, still hooked up with that guy, and felt butterflies in my stomach and happiness the next day. It's really confusing to be told that that MUST be sexual assault, when it's one of my fondest memories.

On the other end of things, there have been situations where I was sober and the other person wasn't, as I mentioned in my earlier post. So you are right that these questions are coming from a place of me trying to understand my own experiences. While I understand how it can come across like maybe I'm trying to excuse behaviors to let people off the hook, I'm really just trying to understand something that I'm super confused about. One of my greatest passions is restorative justice, and I know that means that people need to be held accountable/ hold themselves accountable. I'd be happy to go into more detail about some of these situations where I've been scared about being the party with more power, but I also know that Scarleteen has a policy of not talking with people who are worried that they perpetrated harm, so I do not have to go into it.

If this is at all any help for whoever reads this to understand where I'm coming from, this is an article that I read which both clarified things for me a lot and gave me a ton of questions: https://everydayfeminism.com/2016/05/al ... questions/

I appreciate a lot of this, thanks. Just so you know, I am maxed out on any direct services for the day, so I appreciate the room you're giving me here.

I also do understand and agree with you that it's problematic to say that any use of recreational substances at all automatically equals abuse or assault, and I agree with you that of course it doesn't. Language like "drunk" is a bit tricky here, because by literal definition it means being affected by alcohol to the extent of losing control of one's faculties or behavior (and in that case, people really can't fully consent or likely do a good job with consenting, since that requires control of oneself) -- but it sounds like maybe you are using the word "drunk" to mean something else (like that someone has simply been drinking)?

All the same, I hear and see you with some of what you're saying and also agree with some of what you're saying. I've myself made and done a workshops specifically for groups asking for help and information about managing sex and consent when alcohol is in the mix, and of course know how many people choose to mix substance use and sex (myself included sometimes), so I agree, a lack of any nuance or lack of that information is problematic.

But I am going to leave this one, for now, for others who I think may just do a better job with it right now than I'm finding myself able to. Again, thanks for the allowances you're providing me.

I also know that Scarleteen has a policy of not talking with people who are worried that they perpetrated harm, so I do not have to go into it.

Just to be clear, our policy is that we can't engage with people in our direct services who have, in fact, abused or assaulted someone -- not who are just concerned they have, but where it's known or clear that is what has occurred -- about that abuse beyond referring them to the proper channels for reporting and therapeutic help.

That's to do all we can to provide a safe-feeling space for survivors, something in tremendously short supply, because so many of our staff, including myself, are survivors, so we need a safe workplace (and anything at Scarleteen we offer has to ultimately be something I personally can offer, given how things work here, and I know working with perpetrators is outside my abilities and what is safe for me), but also because working with perpetrators of abuse well and in a professional capacity is something that requires training/education none of us have.

Ah, ok. That makes sense. I'd be happy to share my experiences if someone would be willing to talk with me about it. I think I'll hold off for now until a staff member indicates they're ok talking with me about it, just so I don't take up too much emotional energy before knowing someone is ready to hear about it.

I really do appreciate your feedback a lot and if you feel more up to it at a later point, I would love to hear your opinion. But as I've already said, no pressure Thanks again!

Just so you know, Amethyst, backend in our staff communications, a few people are voicing real appreciation for the care and consideration that you've been having this conversation with. <3

I'm so glad to hear that! Thank you!

Would this (worrying about having caused harm) be an appropriate thing to talk about in a personal chat on here? This isn't a question just for you Heather, but for anyone who sees this

I'm one of the volunteers on our chat service (I'm here Tuesdays & Fridays) and you're welcome to talk about this with me in that space if you want to.

Hey Amethyst,

I was one of those people voicing appreciation for how thoughtful & reflective you clearly are, and for being considerate about Scarleteen's policies

As I said before, and will probably say every post, this is a tricky and weighted subject, so it can be hard for me to write concisely! But it is also a super important and relevant one, and so I am glad that we are talking about it.

In one of your posts awhile back (the one that starts "Great, thanks! Everything that you said makes a lot of sense to me.") you did a great job outlining a bunch of thoughts and questions that you have about this subject. Heather already responded in depth to a few of the things that you brought up, but I'm gonna attempt to tackle a few more:

The first thing I will say is, if two people have a sexual experience together that they *both* felt was consensual than no that is not sexual assault. (I don't meant to be contradicting what Heather said, I don't think I am, but if so, Heather please jump in to clarify your point.) Having a strict rule like: ~if one or both people has had one alcoholic drink or more, than any sexual activity that occurs between them, regardless of their expressed communication and consent, counts as sexual assault~ would both be inaccurate of some people's real lived experiences, and also would be disrespectful of survivors of sexual assault and would not be representing sexual assault as the violence that it is.

From what you shared about the person who biked over to your room and the experience you had with them--it sounds like your gut told you that even though he had been drinking he was in-control and grounded in himself and in the situation, you checked-in about how he was feeling re: drinking, and you checked-in with him again later on to make sure the experience had been a consensual one, to which he answered that it had been and he was really grateful for all your communication. To me, that sounds like a positive consensual experience! To call it a non-consensual experience just because he had something to drink would be following a blanket rule that, as I said, doesn't seem possible with this subject. You asked if it is "inherently more predatory for a sober person to hook up with a drunk person than for two drunk people to hook up." I don't think there is much that is "inherently" more X or less Y. I think most of it is case-by-case, and has to do with a lot of factors, many of them relating to power, also many of them relating to how people are treating each other. One of those factors is going to be differences in states of consciousness (sober, high, tipsy, drunk etc.) but there are many others as well. How does this line up with how you are thinking about all this?

I get the sense that you are someone who likes rules/having a clear sense of right and wrong, does that seem right? If so, I resonate with that And the reality is when it comes to sex, and sex & alcohol, there are not necessarily black-and-white rules for us to follow. It is imperative that we act thoughtfully and empathetically, that we care deeply about the other person's feelings and choices, that we listen to ourselves, that we trust our gut--but those things don't necessarily equate with a clear list of 10 rules. I checked out the Everyday Feminism article that you listed above--I thought it did a great job acknowledging that there are not clear rules, but there are things we can and should keep in mind to help ensure the wellbeing of everyone involved! One tip I especially liked was, along with continuously checking-in during the experience, to check in the next day. I was grateful that it addressed such a loaded subject head-on because as both you and the writer said, we don't want to be disregarding a lot of folks’ real experiences.

You also asked, "Do you see a difference between someone making out while drunk v. having penetrative sex (for eg) while drunk?" Making-out is a lower-risk activity in a lot of ways (pregnancy and STI-risks being among them), so yes I would say it's a lower-risk activity to engage in while drunk. But also, this is gonna be something that depends for each person in terms of what feels weighted to them. Making out for most people is a more low-stakes activity than say, intercourse or oral sex, but it could also feel like a really intense high-stakes activity for other people (maybe they are new to making out, maybe that's the main or only type of sexual activity they have etc.) Does that make sense?

That was my attempt to follow up on some of the really important questions you brought up. Feel free to respond more here, or chat with Mo or another Scarleteen staff person in chat, or both. I didn't really get in to your specific experiences of being harmed, and worrying that you have done harm, but I agree that's a good direction to head from here. I am interested to hear how your restorative justice work informs how you think about your experiences! Restorative justice is so important.

Alice,

Thank you so much for that thoughtful response! Sorry that I'm just responding now. I had a really good conversation with Mo and am feeling better. You are definitely right that I like black-and-white answers-- I wish this subject was easier! If it's still cool with you, would it be ok if I shared a few of the situations on this thread that I talked about with Mo? I'd like your feedback as well if you're willing to give it!

Alice just went away on a very exciting vacation for a few weeks, just so you know. I'm sure she'd be happy to pick this up with you when she gets back, though!

Hi Amythist123,

FYI as chat has been helpful for you before. I will be on chat in about 3 hours time?

Something Heather said a few posts back I think would be really useful to come back to:

...you might be more concerned with someone being accused of abuse or assault than someone being abused or assaulted.

I would be happy to talk about some of these situations you have been in, I can relate to many of them.

When I reflect on what you are saying... the question 'Am I a bad person?' seems to be the main question you are asking, and it is one that is only going to land you in more confusion because we aren't generally good or bad people, we are a mix, (some are plenty worse than others, but still, a mix)

It sounds like most of the people you have reached out to are fine. But if they weren't, the question wouldn't need to be 'Does this make me a bad person?' but rather, 'What do they need from me?'.

I find that the people I really need to distance myself from are those who don't ask that question of themselves, and when the answer is "I need boundaries" do not respect those boundaries. But I'm not feeling that that is an issue you are having?

Hi Jacob,

Thank yuh so much for your kind response. I spoke with Mo over chat and found it very helpful, and I’d love to get your input as well, as long as it’s ok that I’m asking the same questions I asked before (I know Scarleteen has a policy against that).

My biggest fear is definitely that someone feels hurt by something I did. Secondarily, I worry that that makes me a bad person. Your point about being more worried about being an abuser than someone being abused is well taken and it’s something I think about a lot. That’s again where I get tripped up— in some of these rules about consent it seems like it doesn’t matter if someone was hurt, it’s just objectively “bad.” I hope I’m not coming across as not caring about if someone was actually abused, or that I’m centering the feelings of people who harmed over those who have been harmed.

Also, I sent a message via the Scarleteen contact form before you responded, but I was wondering if it would be at all possible for me to edit those last two posts or even delete them? I’m concerned that if someone who was in one of those situations stumbled upon this thread, they’d recognize the situation and feel weird about me sharing it even though it’s anonymous. I’m not sure if that’s a possibility?

Thanks again!