Via Eugene Volokh, there is clearly a fear at Princeton that students won’t be strong enough to withdraw consent. To dance.
Or as Eugene explains it:
Because apparently Princeton students have to be told — frequently — that it’s okay for them to stop dancing if they aren’t into it any more.
This bodes poorly for oral sex. On the other hand, this is Princeton, so oral sex was never a serious concern.
Discover more from Simple Justice
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Definitely I’d require continuing consent for the hamster dance.
No one at any of the Gothic Rock Pile Schools are doing The Antler Dance. Or the Philly Dog New Breed. That’s clear. Don’t people Gator anymore?
I was well acquainted with a social dance floor in my younger days, and I can certainly say that mutual consent and respect were always central to dance floor etiquette. However, frequent stops for verbal consent checks were never “what consent on the dance floor looks like.” I’m not familiar with any form of couples dancing that doesn’t require continuous conscious effort from both partners. If one wishes to stop dancing, one simply stops dancing. Is this for real? Am I missing something here?
This graphic appears to depict hetero dance conduct. Princeton is in trouble now. I can’t imagine what possessed the administration to permit this offensively non-inclusive affront to dancers with diverse dance orientations and/or dance identities.
Sounds like the dance card is ready for a comeback, though I’m surprised a fancy institution like Princeton didn’t use them already. I went to State U, where the dances are more plebeian.
After one of your frequent check ins with your parter, are you supposed to stop dancing while you wait for an answer? That might work for dancing to Daft Punk, but not for anything with rhythm. This is one step beyond madness.
No, This is One Step Beyond, Madness.
Well, I can’t imagine what “Waiting for an answer” would mean otherwise. Asking whether you still have consent, as if that were in question, but then continuing to dance as if it were not, seems kind of a jarring contradiction.
You should plug your nose with one hand while doing a jazz hand with the other and wiggling down to a crouch. This will signal that you are demodalizing the dance area to create a safe space while you await her response. Indicating a phenomenological boundary by doing the Batusi is also acceptable in some jurisdictions.
Quality content right here, folks
Or, that mime thing where she is in an invisible box, and you can’t touch her until she opens the door.
Women have told me that they find nothing sexier than a guy who keeps saying, “Are you sure you want to do this?” and, “We can stop if you want.”
The rules prohibit a link to the “How to Irritate People” sketch in which John Cleese and Connie Booth are on a dinner date.
The rules are very clear about that.
The day is not far removed when children will only be born in working class neighborhoods.
PS Still trying to figure out Archie’s 3 dancers below.
Archie Bell & The Drells – Tighten Up 1968
https://youtu.be/uN7vm-k-AaA
Too scared to say no is just a microscopic line away from too scared to not say yes.
So what’s the point of it?
Affirmative dance consent, now with the latest excuse.