Rasa Von Werder: "Why Has Consent Education Failed?"

By Ajax the Great (Pete Jackson)

(Originally posted on the Vive La Difference! blog)

In light of current events, I recently decided to ask Dr Google, in it's infinite wisdom, "Why Has Consent Education Failed?", and this is the answer we received, verbatim:

Consent education has often fallen short because it is implemented too late, framed too narrowly as a reactive rule rather than a continuous social-emotional skill, and undermined by systemic and political barriers. [1, 2]

Late Timing and "Too Little, Too Late" Delivery

University-level overload: Many institutions rely on one-off modules or heavy orientation slideshows when students arrive on campus, which fails to overwrite years of pre-existing social conditioning, rape culture, and power dynamics. [1, 2]

Delayed introduction: Formal discussions around bodily autonomy and boundaries frequently start in middle or high school rather than early childhood, missing the crucial developmental window where social norms are first established. [1, 2, 3]

Flawed Frameworks and Oversimplification

Binary "Yes or No" limits: Programs often reduce consent to a simple, isolated verbal transaction, ignoring real-world complexities like peer pressure, intoxication, and heavy power imbalances. [1, 2]

Disconnection from everyday life: Treating consent strictly as a "disaster planning" or abstinence-adjacent tool rather than a foundational life skill (respecting physical boundaries, recognizing non-verbal cues) limits its integration into everyday behavior. [1, 2]

Lack of inclusivity: Curriculums often rely on heteronormative frameworks that fail to address the specific vulnerabilities and intersectional harassment faced by LGBTQ+ youth, students of color, and disabled individuals. [1, 2]

Political and Systemic Obstacles

Curriculum erasure and abstinence focus: Many state legislatures restrict comprehensive sex education, favoring abstinence-only or "sexual risk avoidance" models that completely omit or actively strip out consent instruction. [1, 2, 3]

Institutional protection of perpetrators: Educational frameworks focus heavily on individual accountability while structural environments—such as underfunded schools or universities prioritizing reputation—frequently protect offenders and fail to support survivors.

So after over a decade of consent education, why has that apparently not moved the needle even one iota? Because it's basically done too little, too late. It needs to begin MUCH earlier than college, and earlier than even high school (in a general and age-appropriate way, of course), and be ongoing. And it is all too often very poorly designed and executed, and all too often patronizing, paternalistic, and infantilizing, thus it needs to be revamped with best practices. Is it necessary? Absolutely. Is it sufficient? Sadly, no. Rapists practically always know and understand consent at least on a rudimentary level, but they simply don't care. It's entitlement, not ignorance (unless it is willful ignorance born of entitlement), that's the real problem here. And of course, the culture and institutions full of apologists, enablers, and guilty bystanders that give them "social license to operate".

In other words, what typically passes for "consent education" all too often fails to play to the MUSIC of what really happens in practice much of the time. And that needs to be fixed.

Emily Nagoski's model of consent seems to be one of the best ones out there that we could find. In her model, consent is not a binary, but rather a spectrum from enthusiastic, to willing, to unwilling, to coerced. The real dividing line to truly watch out for, where the slope gets slippery, is between willing and unwilling, and then it quickly goes downhill from there.

All that said, ultimately, rape and sexual assault are always and everywhere a cultural problem. We need to change the culture to reflect enthusiastic consent as the standard: "if it's not a HELL YEAH!, it's a HELL NO!". Or at the very least, it must be awake, aware, AND willing consent as the bare minimum. And furthermore, anthropological evidence has shown that it is entirely possible to have relatively "rape-free" societies as well. In such societies, which are typically matrilineal and matrifocal and where women are highly valued members of community and society, rape is NOT considered "macho" or virile behavior at all, but rather quite the opposite, and those very few men who would dare do so roundly face much ridicule and shame for it. It is basically seen as the ultimate loser, failure, and weak behavior, and it is not at all tolerated. (Nor would a "real man" feel the need to prove himself a man by "scoring" just to get proverbial notches on his belt, as true virility is self-evident.) Rapists thus have no "social license to operate" there at all. In other words, nurture seems to be far more important than nature, as male violence against women and children is a cultural problem at base.

(The late anthropologist Peggy Reeves Sanday had a LOT to say about this! We should really heed her words of wisdom.)

When rape and sexual assault (and male violence against women and children in general) are seen as not only dishonorable and degenerate, but also the most unmanly thing a man could possibly do as well, that really seems to be the "Achilles' Heel" to eradicating this pandemic of sexual violence for good.

We need to take away rapists' "social license to operate", and stop enabling them. Yesterday!