By Laura Giroux
Are apps that record sexual consent in a legally binding contract useful or problematic?
The #MeToo movement has inspired the development of apps that aim to verify sexual consent between parties by creating a legally binding agreement through the convenience of a mobile application. The most notable of such apps is LegalFling, an app that uses blockchain technology to allow users to request and verify explicit consent prior to engaging in sexual acts. Users have the ability to specify their willingness to partake in specific activities, which the app then records and can verify through the blockchain if a breach of contract were to occur. In other words, the sexual preferences you have indicated to the app become a legally binding contract with your partner, hence legal action can be taken if you or your partner violates the contract.
Though the idea of identifying one’s preferences before entering a sexual situation does reinforce the importance of consent, consent apps are still more harmful than they are beneficial. A necessary rule of consent is that it can be withdrawn at any moment, and despite the efforts of consent apps to ensure the retractability of consent, it is simply not practical for people to pull out their phones in order to alter their preferences on the app in the midst of a sexual encounter.
Furthermore, there are various factors that consent apps are incapable of determining. For example, there is no way of establishing if someone was under the influence of drugs or alcohol during the time that they recorded their consent through the app. Intoxication compromises judgment, thus someone who has been drinking alcohol or using drugs is unable to consent. Additionally, the app cannot distinguish whether it is the user recording their own sexual preferences or another party entering preferences for them, nor can the app tell if someone is being pressured or manipulated. Given all the factors that the app does not account for, it is legally redundant. If a sexual assault were to occur, the “he said/she said” scenario could still ensue.
In fact, consent apps make it easier for those who have committed a sexual assault to protect themselves from prosecution due to the legally binding contract provided by the app. Yet as evidenced by the issues highlighted above, this consent agreement may not actually be consensual. Therefore, consent apps are not only impractical and redundant, but also are potentially problematic for victims of sexual assault. For an app that claims to help its users “get explicit about sexual consent,” the issues that arise from digitalizing consent make LegalFling and other consent apps ambiguous and dangerous. Instead of continuously pausing sex in order to record their partner’s consent to each sex act in a digitalized legal contract, people should simply educate themselves about consent and practice it in the real world. Respecting the choices of others should not require an app.
Comentarios