As you see, consent is heavily reliant on the aspect of time as for it to demand that a person’s rights have not been infringed upon in the past so that it may remain valid given that, otherwise, a consent was seeked knowing that a person will surly receive it. Meaning, if I make sure that I turn the heat inside the house up to 100 degrees, then you will give your consent to go swim with me because I have enforced the terms that lead up to you having no choice but to give your consent—and doing such is not within the terms of consent as that which comes before it is imposed by the consent and that which comes after it becomes the result of that imposition further enforcing a consent. Understanding, therefore, is assumed to be mutual in respect to all of the elements needed for consent. Meaning: it is assumed that a man understands all the aspects that are needed for a woman to give her consent in order for that consent to remain valid lest men rise up in order to claim. “we all have been raped by these women”. Meaning: if a man does not understand the terms of consent and a woman does, then based on what has a woman found it to be right that he is someone to give her consent to? Surely if it is based on his lack of understanding, then that would not be right. In that, consent serves as evidence that men are/were aware of the implications behind consent as to not be able to say, “we had no clue you needed x, y, z in order for you to give your consent…you should have said something about how oppressed you felt”. In attempting to obtain consent, one is assumed to have reasoned with all consideration his own impact as to be able to assess the impact of a situation onto him correctly.
Expectations discussed is an informal consent in relation to any group activity or any solitary activity that impacts others. If you and I are going to a trip to Vegas, for example, the city itself has a “brand” that gives it a sense of terms of consent in relation to what it is that we can expect to do once we arrive there. If we were going to a trip to Los Angeles, we discuss our expectations for taking such trip as to not have one person be interested to go to Hollywood Walk of Fame while another wanting to go rock climbing…. given that if one person was to say that “I am interested in rock climbing” when they really are not, then that is the same as the other person having the right to say, “If I knew you were not really interested in rock climbing, I would not have consented to take this trip with you”. Hence, expectations are a frame work in relation to consent and the frame work is that which at least summarizes important aspects of the consent. And since the framework of consent is that which is otherwise a full informal consent, then consent creates a formality whenever it is really needed for one to not be able to say that casual sex is something that is covered within the terms of consent.
Seriousness of expectations requires a consent that is more detailed. And what is more detailed in relation to consent is related to avoidance of physical impact and mental impact in relation to that which consent is given to. When consent is required in order for one to have the right to dismiss the physical and/or mental impact of another person, then one can say that consent is invalidated as it is invalidating as it is far reaching in its invalidation beginning from the past into the future—a thing proven by a woman’s ability to get pregnant as such needs a validation for nine months after a woman first gets pregnant to show that an invalidation in relation to initial consent stretches into invalidating the future aspect of one’s life due to bad impact that is sometimes made to appear “good” and “innocent” as to have people be aware of such thing being accounted for in relation to consequences within the nature of this earth. Meaning: if women are treated badly, the nature of this earth has accounted for consequences through the same elements one is using to harm a woman as to say that a pregnancy can be great and it can be a horrific… and having a child can be great and it can also be a nightmare…for one to see that the behavior towards a mother impacts her children and their behavior as well–where such has been accounted for to be a correct thing to happen within the nature of this world.
Consent has a complexity that is equal to how complex it is for one to understand their own condition and their own self in order for one to be able to say, “a person under the age of 18 is not able to give her consent”. And consent has a complexity that does not allow for one to give it while being in a stage under which a person is experiencing a temporary phase that is defining of the self. Meaning: it is wrong for us to find that a teenager’s consent is something we are allowed to take seriously enough to carry its full responsibilities as they are going through a stage under which their selfhood is being newly defined and reframed. Hence, seriousness in relation to consent is more playful in nature when it is regarding little children than it is for teenagers despite the fact that teenagers are able to understand terms of consent more so than a child can and despite the fact that both are in a “growth” stage —-such is due to the fact that a teenager is in a complex state in relation to understanding of the self while a child is in a relaxed state in relation to understanding as the complexity of the teenager is forceful and the growth of the child is relaxed and predictably paced.