By now, many of us have had the misfortune of hearing the “key and lock” analogy when it comes to male and female sexuality. If not, allow me to rob you of what I can only call truly blissful ignorance.
The analogy, more or less, goes like this: A lock that can be opened by many keys is a poor functioning, and therefore useless lock. However, a key that can open many locks is very useful and would be considered a “master key.” Here, the locks are analogous for vagina, and keys are analogous for penis.
Have you finished vomiting yet? Great.
If we ignore the fact that the analogy is baseless due to the fact that it is comparing living, breathing human beings, with the ability of cognitive thought, to inanimate objects, whose functions in no way compare to the functions of genitalia, you get to the heart of why the analogy was spawned in the first place.
It is common belief that sex, for men, is a conquest, and that women are here for their consumption. And not just sex from one woman, sex from multiple women is what is truly desirable. In this quest, men are allowed to use whatever strategies they must in order to achieve their final goal.
This may include lying, manipulation, emotional force, etc., which is then dressed up and called “charisma,” “finesse,” or “game” when it should really be called sexual coercion.
Consent is a hot topic issue these days. More and more people are actively trying to move away from the “If it’s not a no with kicking and screaming, it must be consent” ideology, and diving into what, commonly, are seen as “gray areas.”
(Note: though the issue of consent is applicable to any and all genders, the fact that we live in a patriarchal society largely lends itself to the enabling of sexual abuse performed by cisgender men against cisgender women, which is the focus here.)
There rises the notion of informed consent: informed consent, which is the ability to willfully, freely and mindfully give consent with full knowledge of all possible consequences or endings. This definition allows us to legally classify nondisclosure of STDs and STIs as rape.
There is not full agreeance as to whether or not something like, using the promise of a committed relationship, or affection as a tool to get sex is rape, but it definitely is coercion, and therefore abuse.
At what point did a man’s gratification become more important than a woman’s right to know the truth? To fully understand the terms under which she is giving the gift of her body? (probably forever, given our history).
Why would men even want to engage with a woman who wouldn’t want to engage with them, under more truthful circumstances? Or does the end justify the means?
This “gray area” helps to blur the lines of consent, which unfortunately allows for rape and sexual assault/abuse apologists, victim blaming, etc.
Consent should be very clear: It's a yes. An enthusiastic, without a doubt, non-forced, not physically or emotionally manipulated, non-coerced, yes.
At the end of the day it comes down to the issue of respect and human dignity: women’s bodies are not for the purposes of gratifying sexual desire, no one is entitled to them, and they have the right to make a conscious, informed decision when it comes to their bodies, always.
(Men too!)
