Thread by @chishamba_L

*The Paradox of Sexual Consent*

The writer can not let reality escape without noticing and give insightful thoughts about it. We have been endowed with the faculty of reasoning by the creator and every man is entitled to his opinions whether good or bad. However,,,

we must be very conscious about opinions we make and advocate for because we can easily become victim of what we shape and advocate for.

In most cases it is the poor man who suffers from ill-advised opinions that are embraced as knowledge and the so called consent,,,

has become a hot topic that needs to be handled with conscientiousnes. Allow the writer to start with a mere and simple example that can be easily understood, If a poor man today comment how good looking is her boss at work it will be deemed sexual harassment and if the same

comments are given by the CEO of the company it will be deemed humorous and sexy. That's the tragedy being faced by poor and less powerful men

The definition and redefinition of rape is not an idea of ordinary men and women in the streets but a constructed reality that is

aimed at limiting the effectiveness of men and give a breeding ground falsification of rape. This has been achieved through the so called sexual consent. There are a lot of scenarios where men and women argue that a sleep over does not mean sex so is marriage. In full sense where

nature plays its role without being modified, is it logic to have a marriage with limited conjugal rights? Is it possible for two different sexes who are in an erotic relationship share the same bed and expect them not to have sex? Blaming men for having sex under such conditions

is like to blame monkeys for eating bananas from unguarded fields. This proves that there is an agenda that is being waged against men and painting him as evil through constructed realities.

The portrayal of men as dangerous to women and children has exacerbated the acceptance

of these negative connotations. Consequently, men have been punished for fulfilling their divine obligation to procreate. However, the so called consent in an erotic set up need to be tightly contested with all its imperatives. There is need for debunking of the myth of painting

men as dangerous to women and children because of their aggressive nature especially in defense or in pursuit of self-gratification. We underrate the importance of men in times of comfort and create a mirage of problems in order to pin him down, domesticate making him submissive

and docile for the purpose of power retention and pocket aggrandizement by the corporate world.

Without consciously reminding the importance of men in protecting women against rape we tend to lessen the natural instincts of men in protecting women against rape due to its

definition and redefinition. Sometimes we forget how actually good a man could be, how compassionate, kind, gentle and loving. Men are good, but we are now fearful of doing good because we don’t have the necessary menace to offset it to keep betrayal and exploitation out of

sight. There is no incentive for being morally right as immorality is being rewarded and morality is defined by the thickness of your pockets and position in the social hierarchical structure as highlighted earlier.
Non-governmental organizations have joined the state

institution brigades to define and redefine consent and have carried out mass awareness campaigns telling the women that consent can be withdrawn even in the midst of sex and anything else after withholding consent is rape. If it was something that was meant to reduce crime

rate why not investing much in teaching men about the so called consent? Why not carrying out mass awareness campaigns of telling women the dangers of withholding consent during sex? Is there any need for addressing the perpetrators rather than the victims? Who need to learn the

victim or the potential perpetrator? These questions directs the writer to an opinion that there's a sinister agenda that is hidden.

The use of honeypot as a weapon for victimizing men through some illogical constructed realities should be tightly contested and debunked sexual

relationships in pure form are patriarchal. Unfortunately, Modern civilization, has got sex on the brain, which and has been liberalized as something that can be commodified for consent to be perennial – if you are to lead a life of spiritual agreement that is relationship that

leads to marriage– isn’t the appropriate place for sex regulation and enjoyment. There is no anyway a man can regulate himself especially when he's seduced let alone under sexual arousal.

In litigation, the withdrawal or withholding of consent should be treated as a special

circumstance and the courts should uphold justice not laws that are man-made.

The writer knows the dangers of his opinions and how misleading they might be. However, it is a matter of highlighting what nature dictates against what the law is saying- putting in mind that those

who crafted those laws are anarchists whi never observe it. And they targeted sex as the know its superiority on the hierarchy of pleasure and knowingly that when a man is aroused that's when he will be very weak. That being said, the abandonment of sexuality, that is, the

regulation of genital sexual relationships between man and woman has brought a lot of problems and will overwhelm the state in the near future as it is going to breed corruption among women as they will weaponise the honeypot against men.

The writer is not an exception of

misconception to self-righteousness, but he tries to toss the other side of the coin that is served with a blind eye thereby instigating the court of public opinion to prosecute the issue for the common good. Public opinion and what serves the interest of majority without

corruption but leaving nature play its role is the ultimate supreme court of justice. Whether one is convicted by the man-made laws that are meant to serve few top echelons one must always believe in upholding morality and logic that defines us as human being

#SaveAman